9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (5) TMI 431X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... L. Peeran, Member (J) (Oral)]. - This appeal arises from Order-in-Appeal No. 195 & 196/2002, dated 14-5-2002 passed by Commissioner (Appeals) Chennai. The appellants have taken a preliminary objection that the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) was not maintainable for the reason that the Commissioner has authorized "such authority" who has passed the Order-in-Original to file the rev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct the very adjudicating authority who would other wise be bound by his own order and not expected to be aggrieved by the same. When an appeal is filed on such direction, the appellant will be the adjudicating authority himself and not the authority who gave the direction. It was pointed out that this judgment has been applied by the Tribunal in the following cases :- (1) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Abrasives Ltd., 2003 (55) R.L.T. 233 (CEGAT - Mum.) (9) C.C.E., Madras v. Fascinate Cosmetics, 2000 (116) E.L.T. 266 (T) 2. Ld. Counsel distinguished the two citations filed by learned DR in the case of C.C. v. Merah Exports (P) Ltd., 1987 (29) E.L.T. 401 (T) and Son Export Corporation v C.C., 1989 (42) E.L.T. 308 (T) and submitted that both the citations were rende ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the hearing notice to the appellants and the order has been given ex parte. 3. Ld. DR reiterated the departmental contention. 4. On a careful consideration of the submissions, we notice that the Order-in-Original had been passed by the Additional Commissioner. In terms of Section 129D, the Commissioner of Customs ought to have given directions to the very authority i. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
