9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (1) TMI 557X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Committee of Commissioners at the instance of Chief Commissioner is one without the authority of law. - the law only provides for review the order by a Committee of Commissioners. The law does not provide that the Chief Commissioner can sit over the order of the Committee of Commissioners and given further directions to file appeal or to reconsider the matter. Whereas in the case of Madura Coats, the Hon'ble High Court found that there is no explicit provision in law to prevent from constituting a fresh review committee for deciding the matter which has already been decided. A fresh decision by the same committee is valid in law. - Considering the circumstances, we allow the delay in the present case. - Delay condoned - Decided i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red to file appeal in terms of Section 35E(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. 2. Revenue's contention is that the decision to review is an administrative decision and therefore it can be modified /reviewed. Learned AR relies on the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Commissioner of Service Tax Vs. Japan Airlines International Co. Ltd. - 2015 (39) STR 541 (DEL). He also relies on the decision of Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of Commissioner of Customs, Tuticorin Vs. Madura Coats Pvt. Ltd. - 2014 (307) ELT 276 (Mad). 3. On the other hand, the Counsel's appearing for the parties state that the Committee of Commissioner once having passed the review order under Section 35E(1) of the Central ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted on the decision of the Division Bench of this court rendered in Kundalia Industries's case, which in any event, is the subject matter of the instant reference. For the reasons that we would give hereafter, it would be clear that the approach commended in Kundalia Industries case does not find favour with us. 11. Therefore, having regard to the above, which is, that in our opinion, the decision rendered by the Committee of Commissioners is an administrative function, it would, to our minds, therefore, not require the members of the Committee to meet, consult and give independent reasons, as contended before us by Mr. Mittal. In terms of the above, it is clear that the Committee of Commissioners is performing the administrat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... so as to deter from constituting a fresh Review Committee for deciding a matter which has already been decided. Since there is no embargo nor inhibition in the relevant section with regard to constitution of new Review Committee for taking a decision afresh in respect of the subject already decided, this Court is of the view that the reason given by the Appellate Tribunal for dismissing the petition which has been filed for condoning the delay cannot be accepted and further, we are concerned with only to condone the delay of 30 days. 10. Considering the fact there is no inhibition in the concerned section for constituting a fresh Review Committee for taking decision afresh which has already been decided and since the petition in quest ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
