2012 (12) TMI 395 - AT - Customs

Jurisdiction to adjudicate the matter - held that - impugned show cause notice was assigned to the Commissioner of Customs (Import), Nhava Sheva for adjudication - impugned order passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Import), Nhava Sheva is without jurisdiction - vide F.No. S/V-30/Misc-300/2005-M-II dated 27.08.2009 the appointment of Shri K.K.Srivastava, Commissioner of Customs (Adjudication) has been withdrawn - prayer made by the learned AR cannot be accepted as there is no adjudicating authority appointed to adjudicate the impugned show cause notice - impugned order is set aside and the appeals are allowed.

Summary

Issues: Jurisdiction of the adjudicating authority, legality of the impugned order, validity of the show cause notice conversion, jurisdiction of the Commissioner of Customs (Import), withdrawal of the adjudicating authority's appointment.

In this judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT MUMBAI, the appellants appealed against an impugned order and applied for a stay of the demand. The tribunal decided to dispose of the appeals and stay applications together. The appellant's counsel argued that the Commissioner who adjudicated the show cause notice lacked jurisdiction, thus the impugned order should be set aside. On the other hand, the respondent's counsel suggested remanding the matter back for fresh adjudication. The tribunal noted that the show cause notice was converted into another file assigned to a specific Commissioner for adjudication. However, the impugned order was passed by a different Commissioner who claimed jurisdiction based on a notification. Upon examining the notification, the tribunal found no assignment of the show cause notice to the Commissioner who passed the impugned order, concluding that the order was without jurisdiction. Additionally, the tribunal observed that the appointment of the adjudicating authority had been withdrawn, rendering the respondent's prayer for remand invalid. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeals were allowed, with the appeals and stay applications disposed of accordingly.