9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (5) TMI 43 - AT - CustomsCompounding order - Appellant approached the Hon ble High Court of Telangana on the ground that proper justification was not done by the Adjudicating Authority (The Chief Commissioner) while passing the Order - Jurisdiction of CESTAT to hear the Appeal against the Order passed by Chief Commissioner in terms of Section 129A of the Customs Act, 1962 - HELD THAT - From the order passed by the Hon ble Telangana High Court in order dated 14.11.2018, it is seen that the High Court has not taken any view that Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to decide the Appeal. On the other hand, the maintainability of appeal has been allowed to be decided by the Tribunal itself. From the judgment of Gujarat High Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise Vs Girish B. Mishra 2013 (6) TMI 179 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT , it is observed that the very issue was before the Hon ble Gujarat High Court. The Hon ble High Court did not entertain the Appeal filed by the Revenue on the issue of jurisdiction of the Tribunal while deciding the appeal filed against Compounding Order passed by the Chief Commissioner. Based on the Order passed by the Hon ble Telangana High Court as well as the decision of the Hon ble Gujarat High Court, which is in force as on date, it is found that the appellant requires to be given an opportunity once again to go before the Chief Commissioner/ Principal Chief Commissioner. The matter is remanded to the Chief Commissioner/ Principal Chief Commissioner who will give opportunity to the Appellant to make all their oral and written submissions along with documentary evidence and follow principles of natural justice while deciding the matter - Appeal allowed by way of remand.
Issues involved:
The issues involved in the judgment are the jurisdiction of the Tribunal to decide the appeal against the Compounding Order passed by the Chief Commissioner under Section 129A of the Customs Act, 1962. Comprehensive Details: 1. Jurisdiction of the Tribunal: The appellant approached the Hon'ble High Court of Telangana challenging the Compounding Order passed by the Chief Commissioner, alleging lack of proper justification in the adjudication. The High Court directed the appellant to file an appeal before the CESTAT against the Chief Commissioner's order. Subsequently, the Department filed a Review Petition before the High Court, contending that the CESTAT did not have the jurisdiction to hear the appeal under Section 129A of the Customs Act, 1962. The High Court, while not entirely convinced by the arguments, left the issue of jurisdiction to be decided by the CESTAT during the appeal process. 2. Decision and Precedents: The appellant's counsel argued that as per Section 129A(1) of the Customs Act, appeals can only be filed before the Appellate Tribunal when the orders are passed by the Principal Commissioner of Customs or Commissioner of Customs as an Adjudicating Authority. Since the Compounding Order was issued by the Chief Commissioner, who does not fall under this definition, the appeal was questioned. Referring to a judgment of the Gujarat High Court in a similar case, where the High Court did not entertain the Revenue's appeal on the jurisdiction issue, the appellant sought a similar outcome in this case. 3. Remand and Directions: After considering the orders of the Telangana High Court and the Gujarat High Court, the Tribunal decided to remand the matter back to the Chief Commissioner/Principal Chief Commissioner. The appellant was directed to be given another opportunity to present their case, including oral and written submissions with documentary evidence, ensuring principles of natural justice are followed. The Chief Commissioner was instructed to adhere to the guidelines issued by CBIC while deciding the matter, with a strict timeline of completing the process within four months from the date of the Tribunal's order. This judgment clarifies the jurisdictional aspect of appeals related to Compounding Orders passed by the Chief Commissioner under the Customs Act, emphasizing the role of the CESTAT in deciding such matters based on legal provisions and precedents.
|
