9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (2) TMI 17X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2(34) of the Customs Act, 1962. In these circumstances, the Appeals filed against the decisions of the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, Paradip, are not maintainable under Section 129A of the Customs Act, and accordingly, the same are dismissed. Miscellaneous Applications are also disposed of. - APPEAL NOs.C/A/336-337/2012 - ORDER NO.M-1-2/KOL/13, A-2-3/KOL/13 - Dated:- 2-12-2013 - DR. D.M.MISRA, J. FOR THE APPELLANT: SHRI R. NAIR, ADVOCATE FOR THE RESPONDENT : SHRI S.CHAKRABORTY, A.R.(ASSTT. COMMR.) JUDGEMENT These two Miscellaneous Applications are filed by the Applicant for early hearing of the Appeals. The said Applications were mentioned on 28.12.2012 by the learned Advocate for the Applicant, as the live consignme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tted that the present decisions were passed by the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner of Customs, pursuant to the representations made by them to the concerned Commissioner of Customs from time to time. He has further submitted that the decisions were taken by the ld. Commissioner of Customs on their representations and were communicated to them through Assistant Commissioner of Customs. On a query from the Bench, ld. Advocate submitted that even though the proper officer to decide their representations is the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, but the present issue being placed before the ld. Commissioner of Customs, he had in fact took the decisions, which were communicated to them by the Assistant Commissioner of Customs. He has sub ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... were merely communicated to the Appellant through the Assistant Commissioner of Customs. 8. Heard both sides and perused the record. I find that the Appellant had filed these Appeals against decisions/letters -both dated 20.12.2012 bearing Nos. C. No. EDI Job No.1885876/7084 and C.No. EDI JOB No.2028104/7088 issued by Assistant Commissioner of Customs, Paradip. On a plain reading of the said decisions/letters, it is clear that the finding/decision was passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Customs himself and not on the direction of the ld. Commissioner of Customs. Nowhere in the said decisions/letters, the Assistant Commissioner of Customs had mentioned that the same were communicated by him as being directed by the ld. Commissioner of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
