2018 (11) TMI 1305 - AT - Customs

Maintainability of appeal - issue relates to import of goods as baggage and the penalty - Section 129A of the Customs Act, 1962 - Held that - Undisputedly, the present appeal is filed against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) who has disposed the appeal against the order of the adjudicating authority regarding the import of goods as baggage - In view of the specific stipulation contained in the first proviso to Section 129A of the Customs Act, 1962, the jurisdiction of this Tribunal is ousted in cases relating to import of goods as baggage and the revision application against such order would lie before the Government of India. Appeal dismissed as not maintainable.

Summary

Issues: Jurisdiction of Tribunal over appeal against order on import of goods as baggage.

In this case, the issue revolves around the maintainability of an appeal filed against an order-in-appeal passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) regarding the import of goods as baggage. The Revenue argued that the appeal cannot be challenged before the Tribunal due to the first proviso to Section 129A of the Customs Act, 1962, which stipulates that such matters should be contested through a revision application before the Government of India. The appellant, on the other hand, contended that no objection was raised regarding the appeal's maintainability before the Tribunal. However, they expressed willingness to approach the Government of India for a revision application.

The Tribunal, after considering the arguments presented, observed that the appeal was indeed against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) concerning the import of goods as baggage. Given the specific provision in the first proviso to Section 129A of the Customs Act, 1962, the Tribunal's jurisdiction in such cases is ousted, and the appropriate recourse is a revision application before the Government of India. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal as not maintainable. Nevertheless, the appellant was granted the liberty to file the necessary revision application before the Government of India, with the time spent in pursuing the case before the Tribunal to be considered while condoning any delay in filing the revision application.

Ultimately, the appeal was officially dismissed as not maintainable by the Tribunal, and the parties were informed that they could approach the Government of India for further proceedings. This decision was pronounced in court by the Member (Judicial) of the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai.