2024 (5) TMI 578 - HC - Customs

Condonation Of delay in filing appeals - service through publication - Proper officer - Jurisdiction to issue Show Cause Notice - HELD THAT - The Coordinate Bench of this court has disposed of several appeals, finding that the orders passed by CESTAT to the aforesaid effect were not justified and further directing the CESTAT to decide the appeals on merit, including the question of jurisdiction, uninfluenced by the decision of this case of Mangali Impex Ltd. 2016 (5) TMI 225 - DELHI HIGH COURT as the operation in the said order has been stayed by the Supreme Court in 2016 (8) TMI 1181 - SC ORDER . The delay in filing these appeals are condoned. Thus, we consider it apposite to also dispose of the appeals in similar terms. The impugned orders are set aside. The appeals are restored before the CESTAT. The appeals are disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

Summary

Issues involved: Delay in filing appeals, service of respondents, impugned final orders by CESTAT, question of jurisdiction, condonation of delay, disposal of appeals.

Delay in filing appeals:
The appeals raised a question that had been the subject matter of previous petitions and similar cases had been remitted to the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT). The delay in filing these appeals was condoned in light of similar circumstances in other cases.

Service of respondents:
Respondents were directed to be served through publication, and despite proper service, none appeared on behalf of the respondents. As a result, the respondents were proceeded ex-parte.

Impugned final orders by CESTAT:
The appeals challenged final orders dated 09.06.2017 and 15.06.2017 respectively. The CESTAT had remanded the matter to the Adjudicating Authority for deciding the issue on the question of jurisdiction after a decision by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a civil appeal.

Question of jurisdiction:
The Coordinate Bench of the court had disposed of several appeals, finding that the CESTAT's orders were not justified. The CESTAT was directed to decide the appeals on merit, including the question of jurisdiction, without being influenced by a specific case pending in the Supreme Court.

Condonation of delay:
The delay in filing the appeals was condoned, similar to other cases. The appeals were disposed of in similar terms as other cases with condoned delays.

Disposal of appeals:
The impugned orders were set aside, and the appeals were restored before the CESTAT. CESTAT was directed to decide the appeals on merits, including the question of jurisdiction, without being influenced by a specific court decision. The court clarified that it had not expressed any opinion on merits, and CESTAT was free to take an appropriate view.

This summary provides a detailed breakdown of the judgment based on the issues involved in the case.