2024 (5) TMI 212 - HC - Customs

Jurisdiction of the Tribunal to entertain the appeal related to duty drawback - confiscation of goods - HELD THAT - As per the appellant, in terms of Section 129(DD) of the Customs Act, 1962 the Act , the remedy of impugning the order was by way of a Revision to the Central Government and an appeal to the Tribunal was not maintainable. Said position is not disputed by learned counsel for respondent who concedes that in terms of Section 129(DD) of the Act, the remedy was only by way of a Revision and not by way of Appeal to the Tribunal. Learned counsel, however, submits that since the objection was not raised at an appropriate stage, respondent could not approach the Revisional Authority within the time prescribed by the statute. She submits that an opportunity be granted to the respondent to now file a Revision in terms of Section 129(DD) of the Act before the Central Government. Thus, the impugned order dated 25.05.2023 is set aside. An opportunity is granted to the respondent to prefer a Revision u/s 129(DD) of the Act against the Order-in-Appeal dated 14.10.2022, passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeal) within a period of two months from today. Appeal is disposed of in the above terms.

Summary

Issues involved: Jurisdiction of the Tribunal to entertain the appeal u/s Section 129(DD) of the Customs Act, 1962.

Summary:
1. The subject appeal challenges the order passed by the Tribunal confirming a demand of drawback and order of confiscation of goods already exported under drawback against the respondent.
2. The main challenge in the appeal is the jurisdiction of the Tribunal to entertain the appeal filed by the respondent, citing a previous decision of a coordinate Bench of the Court.
3. The respondent contends that the Revenue had not objected to the jurisdiction of the Tribunal to entertain the appeal against the Order-in-Appeal, similar to a previous case.
4. Referring to a previous case, the Court held that no consent, waiver, or acquiescence could confer jurisdiction upon a Court if jurisdiction was otherwise barred by statute.
5. The appellant argues that as per Section 129(DD) of the Customs Act, 1962, the remedy for impugning the order was by way of a Revision to the Central Government, not by way of an appeal to the Tribunal, which the respondent concedes.
6. The impugned order is set aside, granting the respondent an opportunity to file a Revision under Section 129(DD) of the Act against the Order-in-Appeal within two months.
7. If the Revision is filed within the given timeframe, it will be decided on merits and not dismissed on the ground of limitation.
8. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.