9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (11) TMI 152X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the appellant Revenue. 2. This is Revenue's Appeal against the order of Commissioner (Appeals) No. CC(A)CUS/352/2013 dated 10.6.2013. Revenue in their grounds of appeal stated that the value of the impugned goods is Rs. 77,25,934/-. This value, which may be subject to revision on the higher side in the final decision/order of the adjudicating authority, is much beyond the threshold value of R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the rank of Assistant Commissioner does not render the same a decision or order passed by Assistant Commissioner appealable before the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) under Section 128 (1) of the Customs Act, 1962.This has clearly been upheld in a number of cases including Shri Dhananjay Kumar vs. Commissioner of Customs (Import), Nhavasheva [2008 - TIOL - 2867 - CESTTAT - MUM ] where it is he ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h an appeal should be with CESTAT and not with Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) as per Section 129A (1) of the Customs Act, 1962.Therefore, Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) has grossly erred in the matter of jurisdiction as well as the legality and passed an order bad in law. Revenue also points out that the Commissioner (Appeals) has exceeded to his jurisdiction in modifying the order passed by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e point that such order is interim in nature pending final determination of the issue by the adjudicating authority. Reference is also made to latest Mumbai;s judgment in the case of Akanksha Sytax Pvt. Ltd. vs. C.C. (General), Mumbai - 2012 - TIOL - 1697 - CESTAT - MUM 4. I find force in the department's contention. The Commissioner (Appeals) has passed order without ascertaining the facts as st ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
