9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (1) TMI 557X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Member (T) (for the Bench)]. The appeal No. C/283/06 is by the Department against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) Nos. 7 8/Cus/JPR-I/2006 dated 30-1-06. 1.2 The cross-objection CO/126/06 is by M/s. Continental Exports and CO/135/06 is by M/s. Indo Kiseki Co. Ltd. and they are connected to the above appeal. 2. Heard both sides. 3. According to the submissions of learned DR, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... toms authorities on 2-1-2004 and 7-1-04 claiming that M/s. Indo Kiseki Co. Japan has by mistake sent the consignment meant for a Hong Kong party to Continental Exports, India and sought permission to return the consignment back to M/s. Indo Kiseki Co.. This request was not acceded to and the consignment was subject to detailed examination on 12-1-04 and it was found to contain 23 packets of neatly ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 3.3 Against the order of the original authority, appeal was filed not only by M/s. Continental Exports but also by Japan based consignor M/s. Indo Kiseki Co. Ltd. The Commissioner has entertained the appeal of the consignor as well and set aside the order of the original authority and permitted re-export of the consignment to the consignor, M/s. Indo Kiseki Co. Japan. 4. Learned DR submitted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ave considered the submissions from both sides. We notice that the Commissioner (Appeals) had entertained the appeal of M/s. Indo Kiseki Co. Japan, even though he was not a party to the proceeding before the original authority as no show cause notice was issued to them. Even if the Commissioner (Appeals) felt that the party had locus standi to file the appeal before him, it would have been appropr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
