9911796707
TMI Blog1992 (4) TMI 150X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fusing to extend the validity period of the warehousing bond executed by the applicants. 2. Shri Mehta submitted that appeal is not maintainable since the impugned order was passed under Section 61 of the Customs Act as an administrative order. He said that requisition for extension of warehousing period of bond has been rejected by the Collector under proviso to Section 61(b) of the Customs Act. Since it is not an adjudicating proceedings but a mere administrative proceedings, no dispute exists and, as such, it is not an appealable order. He contended that judicial determination or order sought to be appealed against must also have character of judicial adjudication and distinction between judicial and administrative acts has been cl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hok Mehta, learned SDR, submitted that Section 72 of the Act was considered in the decision cited by the appellant s counsel as it was with reference to Section 72 and further judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Jaswant Sugar Mills (supra) was not taken note of as it was not placed before the Bench. 5. We have carefully considered the arguments advanced on both sides and perused the records. The point to be considered is this case is whether an extension or rejection of validity period of warehousing bond as contemplated under proviso (ii) to Section 61(1)(b) amounts to an appealable order or not. The relevant provisions of Section 61(1)(b) proviso (ii) is reproduced as under:- 61(1)(b) proviso (ii). in the case of any goods whi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) and extension of the period has become necessary. Therefore, the words sufficient cause being shown in Section 110(2) must mean that the Collector must determine on materials placed before him that they warrant extension of time. Therefore, there is no question in such cases of the subjective satisfaction of the Collector because what he is asked to do by the proviso is to determine that the cause shown before him warrants an extension of time. Hence, it is difficult to comprehend how he can come to this determination unless he has before him the pros and cons of the matter because ex parte determination by the Collector would expose his decision to be one sided and based on incorrect statement of facts. Therefore, the power under the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he goods are liable to confiscation by reason of the illegal importation. It is, therefore, clear that in view of words sufficient cause being shown in Section 110(2), the legislature did not intend to give the Collector the same power for extension of time." (para 13). Following the ratio of the aforesaid decision we are of the view that the impugned order in question is appealable order and, accordingly, the appeal is maintainable. We also take note of the decision in the case of K.S. Diesels Ltd., (supra) cited by the appellants counsel wherein it was held that order passed under Sections 59, 61 and 72 of the Customs Act are appealable. 6. In the view we have taken that the appeal is maintainable. The Registry is directed to post ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
