2017 (2) TMI 181 - AT - Customs

Maintainability of appeal - The ld.Advocate for the appellants strongly challenged the impugned order passed by the ld.Commissioner (Appeals), wherein she has deleted the last paragraph of the Order-in-Original, which was very aptly mentioned by the adjudicating authority by passing the order, since the matter is pending before the Hon ble High Court of Patna, he vehemently argued that the impugned order needs to be set aside - Held that - The Revenue instead of pursuing the case before the Hon ble High Court, proceeded to pass a review order and thereby filed appeal before the lower appellate authority, which is disrespect to the judicial process - appeal dismissed as infructuous

Summary

Issues:
1. Appeal against Order-in-Appeal Nos.897-899/Pat/Cus/Appeal/2014
2. Review of Order-in-Original and appeal filed by the Department
3. Challenge to the impugned order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals)

Analysis:
1. The appellant filed two appeals against Order-in-Appeal Nos.897-899/Pat/Cus/Appeal/2014 dated 20.10.2014 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs & S.Tax, Patna. The appellant's advocate, Shri Arijit Chakraborty, highlighted specific paragraphs from the Order-in-Original related to the Hon'ble High Court's orders in the case. The Commissioner of Customs (Prev.), Patna, reviewed the Order-in-Original, and an appeal was filed by the Department before the Commissioner (Appeals), Patna. The Commissioner (Appeals) disposed of the appeals without issuing any hearing notices to the respondents, leading to a challenge by the appellant against the impugned order.

2. The Department preferred an appeal based on the review of the Order-in-Original, seeking the deletion of the last paragraph to make the order operative. The appellant argued that the last paragraph was essential and challenged the impugned order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). The Tribunal noted that the adjudicating authority had mentioned that the order would be effective only after the outcome of certain pending cases before the Hon'ble High Court of Patna. The Tribunal criticized the Revenue for not pursuing the case before the High Court and instead passing a review order, deeming it disrespectful to the judicial process.

3. After hearing both sides and reviewing the appeal records, the Tribunal found that the adjudicating authority's decision to wait for the outcome of pending cases before the High Court was appropriate. The Tribunal allowed one appeal by restoring the Order-in-Original with its last paragraph and dismissed another appeal as infructuous. The Tribunal emphasized that the ineffective Order-in-Original rendered the appeal unnecessary, as there was no valid reason to file an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) and subsequently before the Tribunal. Both appeals were disposed of accordingly.

This detailed analysis covers the issues raised in the appeals, the review of the Order-in-Original, challenges to the impugned order, and the Tribunal's decision on each appeal, providing a comprehensive understanding of the judgment.