2023 (7) TMI 392 - HC - Customs

Requirement to determine correct Fe content - Iron Ore Fines - error apparent on the face of record - Failure on the part of Adjudicating Authority to follow the direction of Tribunal in Remand back Proceedings 2022 (8) TMI 11 - CESTAT KOLKATA - HELD THAT - On perusal of the order in original, it is found that the adjudicating authority has not acted strictly as per findings, observations and directions given by the Tribunal rather it has given its own reason and opinion and has not implemented the aforesaid order of the Tribunal in its letter and spirit. Though Mr. Maiti, Respondent Customs Authority very vehemently argues that since the order-in-original is an appealable order under the statute before the first appellate authority, this Court should not interfere with the same on the ground of availability of alternative remedy which is not convincing and acceptable to this Court for the exceptional reason that aforesaid order of the Tribunal which has attained its finality after the order of the Division Bench of this Court by neither interfering with nor setting aside the same, the adjudicating authority was bound to carry the aforesaid order of the Tribunal in its letter and spirit and the impugned order-in-original is not only a factual error it is a jurisdictional error and error in law since it is contrary to the decision of the Supreme Court upon which even the first appellate authority in the first round has relied and held in favour of the petitioner and for the same reasoning the Tribunal has remanded the matter back by its aforesaid order. The aforesaid impugned order in original dated 5th January, 2023 is not sustainable in law and is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the adjudicating authority concerned to implement the aforesaid order - Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues involved: Challenge to adjudication order, interpretation of tribunal's directions, compliance with tribunal's order, jurisdictional error in impugned order.

Challenge to Adjudication Order: The petitioner challenged the impugned adjudication order dated 5th January, 2023, which was passed on the order of remand by the learned Tribunal dated 28th July, 2022. The Tribunal's order emphasized determining correct Fe content based on guidelines from a previous court judgment. The First Appellate Authority's order was upheld by the Tribunal, stating that not following higher court orders would be a mistake rectifiable under the law. The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and directed the lower authority to finalize assessments in accordance with the higher court's guidelines.

Interpretation of Tribunal's Directions: The Division Bench of the Court dismissed the appeal by the Customs Authority challenging the Tribunal's order, which had attained finality. The Court noted that the Tribunal's findings and directions were binding on the adjudicating authority. The adjudicating authority was expected to strictly adhere to the Tribunal's observations, findings, and directions in its remand order while passing the impugned order.

Compliance with Tribunal's Order: The Court found that the adjudicating authority did not strictly follow the Tribunal's directions in the impugned order. Despite arguments that the order was appealable, the Court held that the authority was bound to implement the Tribunal's order. The impugned order was deemed not sustainable in law, set aside, and remanded back to the adjudicating authority for compliance with the Tribunal's directions within eight weeks.

Jurisdictional Error in Impugned Order: The impugned order was considered a jurisdictional error and contrary to the Supreme Court's decision, leading to the Court's decision to set it aside. The Court emphasized the importance of implementing the Tribunal's order in its entirety and providing relief to the petitioner as per the relevant customs notification. The writ petition was disposed of with these observations and directions.