2011 (4) TMI 1142 - AT - Customs

Condonation of delay - respondent points out that the appeals filed by them, all directed against Order-in-Original No.189/2009 dated 30.12.08 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Adjudication), Mumbai) were allowed by way of remand vide Order No. A/146 to 200/09/CSTB/C.II dated 13.8.09 and, therefore, the Revenue s appeal is also liable to be disposed of likewise - appeal allowed by way of remand, Revenue s appeal stands disposed of

Summary

Issues: Delay in filing appeal, imposition of penalty under Sec.112(a) of the Customs Act

The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai, involved an appeal by the department that was filed with a delay of 2 months and 20 days. The respondent's counsel highlighted that their appeals were allowed by way of remand, indicating that the Revenue's appeal should be treated similarly. The Revenue's appeal was allowed to proceed on merits after the COD application was accepted. Although the show-cause notice proposed a penalty under Sec.112(a) of the Customs Act, the adjudicating authority did not impose any penalty on the respondent. The Revenue sought to impose a penalty in their appeal, which was reiterated by the ld.SDR. The Tribunal allowed the appeal by way of remand, requesting the Commissioner to consider if a penalty should be imposed on the respondent under Sec.112(a) and to what extent, following the terms of the earlier remand order diligently.

In conclusion, the Revenue's appeal was disposed of with the direction for the adjudicating authority to carefully consider the question of imposing a penalty under Sec.112(a) of the Customs Act on the respondent, M/s. Videocon International Ltd., as per the terms of the remand order dated 13.8.09. The judgment emphasized the importance of following the earlier remand order while making this determination.