9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (2) TMI 541X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... emands. 3. Today, stay applications are listed before us. 4. During the course of arguments, Shri S.S. Sekhon, learned Advocate for the appellants took a preliminary objection that the Commissioner of Customs (Prev.) has no jurisdiction to issue the show cause notice as per Notification No. 15/2002-Cus. (N.T.), dated 7-3-2002. Therefore, he prayed that before dealing with the case, their preliminary objection raised be decided first. 5. He submitted that as per the said Notification, the Commissioner of Customs (Prev.) has the jurisdiction over the Mumbai, Thane and Raigad districts in the State of Maharashtra. As Sahar Air Cargo Complex and Sahar Airport are falling under Mumbai Suburban district, therefore, the Commissioner of Customs (Prev.) has no jurisdiction to deal with the matter falling the jurisdiction of Mumbai Suburban district. Hence, the show cause notice has been issued without jurisdiction and the said issue was taken up before the adjudicating authority and the adjudicating authority has given a vague finding. Therefore, the order is to be set aside. 6. Shri Y.K. Agrawal, Addl. Commissioner, learned AR replied to the preliminary objection an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ustoms, Aircargo (Import) and General, Delhi, Aircargo (Export), Delhi, (ICDs), Delhi. Deputy Commissi-oners, or Assistant Commissi-oners, of Customs working under the control of the Commissi-oners of Customs, Aircargo (Import) and General, Delhi, Aircargo (Export), Delhi, (ICDs), Delhi. 2 The National Capital Territory of Delhi, the whole of the State of Haryana and the NOIDA Export Processing Zone in the State of Uttar Pradesh. Commissi-oner of Customs (Preventive), Delhi. Additional Commissi-oners, or Joint Commissi-oners, of Customs working under the control of the Commissi-oner of Customs (Preventive), Delhi. Deputy Commissi-oners, or Assistant Commissi-oners, of Customs working under the control of the Commissi-oner of Customs (Preventive), Delhi. 3 a. Port of Mumbai, Mumbai Airport (Santa Cruz and Chatrapati Shivaji International Airports), the area under the jurisdiction of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation, and the designated areas in the Continental Shelf and Exclusive Economic Zone of India as declared by the Government of India fro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issued by the Government of Maharashtra. As per the jurisdiction notified in the Gazette of State of Maharashtra, the City of Mumbai district was having the jurisdiction over Colaba in south to Mahim and Sion in north and Mumbai Suburban district was consisted of three sub-divisions namely Kurla, Andheri and Borivali. As per the new jurisdiction, there is no district named as Mumbai in the State of Maharashtra. 9. On perusal of the Notification it is also found that jurisdiction of the Commissioner of Customs, Mulund CFS and General, Mumbai, (Export) (Import), Mumbai, (Airport) Mumbai, Air Cargo (Import), Mumbai, Air Cargo (Export) Mumbai are the area i.e. Port of Mumbai, Mumbai Airport, the area under the jurisdiction of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation, and the designated areas in the Continental Shelf and Exclusive Economic Zone of India as declared by the Government of India from time to time. From the above, it is clear that the Commissioner of Customs, Airport/Air Cargo, Import/Export is having the jurisdiction over whole of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation i.e. district of City of Mumbai and Mumbai Suburban district, but the same is not in the case of Commissioner of C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed by my learned brother Shri Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial); however, I am unable to subscribe to the views recorded in his order for the reasons discussed below. 14. The short issue for consideration in the instant case is whether the expression Mumbai District in the State of Maharashtra appearing at Sr. No. 4 of the Table annexed to Notification No. 15/2002-Cus. (N.T.), dated 7-3-2002 in respect of jurisdiction of the Commissioner of Customs (Prev.), Mumbai covers both the districts of City of Mumbai and Mumbai Suburban district or not and accordingly, whether the Commissioner of Customs (Prev.) has jurisdiction over both these districts or not? 15. This issue was raised before the adjudicating authority and in his finding in para 15.2.2 of the impugned order dated 30-4-2009, he has held as follows :- Against this background the expression Mumbai District used in Notification No. 15/2002-Cus. (N.T.), dated 7-3-2002 covers either both Mumbai City District and Mumbai suburban District or it does not cover any of these districts at all. Since the latter argument gives trivial result, the acceptable argument is that the expression Mumbai District will include both ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be addressed is whether the expression Mumbai District of State of Maharashtra would cover both Mumbai City district as well as Mumbai Suburban district? If it is held that there is no such thing as Mumbai district, a view that has been taken by my learned brother Member (Judicial), then the expression, Mumbai District of State of Maharashtra becomes entirely redundant. Such an interpretation is impermissible in law as has been held by this Tribunal in the case of Collector of Central Excise v. Jiyajeerao Cotton Mills Ltd. - 1984 (15) E.L.T. 259 (Tri.), wherein it was held that - it is well settled that any interpretation which says that a piece of legislation was redundant or meaningless ought to be avoided. The said order of the Tribunal was upheld by the Hon ble Apex Court on merits. Though the said decision was passed in context of the Central Excise Notification No. 226/77, the ratio of the same, in my view, applies to Customs Notification also. 19. Again, this Tribunal in the case of British India Corporation Ltd. v. CCE, Chandigarh reported in 1986 (25) E.L.T. 727 held that every word in a provision has to be given due meaning and an interpretation so as not to mak ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uld then mean that the law cannot be enforced. Such an interpretation does not stand to any logic or reason and has grave implications with regard to enforcement of law. The purpose and object of statutory interpretation is to bring harmony in construction so that the legislative intent is achieved. Therefore, I am of the view that though there is no district as Mumbai District and what exists are only Mumbai City district and Mumbai Suburban district, the expression Mumbai District has to be interpreted in a harmonious manner; if that is done, the said expression would cover both Mumbai City district as well as Mumbai Suburban district. In view of the above, I am of the view that the Commissioner of Customs (Prev.) has jurisdiction over Sahar Air Cargo Complex falling under the jurisdiction of Mumbai Suburban district. It will also be relevant to mention here that the Commissioner of Customs (Prev.) has been notified as proper officer of Customs by retrospectively amending Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962 vide the Customs (Amendment and Validation) Act, 2011. Consequently, the Commissioner of Customs (Prev.), Mumbai has jurisdiction to issue show cause notice in the instant cas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der the enabling provision of law. He further submitted that the statutory provisions in fiscal statutes must be strictly construed and it is well settled that in field of taxation, hardship or equity has no role to play in determining eligibility to tax and it is for the Legislature to determine the same. He further submitted that jurisdiction on a particular territory cannot be conferred by practice or consent. Therefore, while the Commissioner of Customs, Air Cargo Complex has been conferred the jurisdiction over whole of Mumbai Municipal Corporation but the same is not in the case of Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) and the Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) has no jurisdiction over Mumbai Suburban District which falls under jurisdiction of Mumbai Municipal Corporation and includes Sahar Air Cargo Complex. Therefore, learned Mumbai (Judicial) has rightly held that Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) has not jurisdiction over the Sahar Air Cargo Complex as he is not appointed as Commissioner of Customs for area falling under Mumbai Suburban District. 23.1 He further submitted that Hon ble Member (Technical) has held that if it is held that there is no such thing as Mu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Bishwanath - 1997 (96) E.L.T. 224 (S.C.). (ii) C.K. Geever v. Commissioner of Customs, Chennai - 2009 (235) E.L.T. 304 (Tri.-Chennai). (iii) Copier Force India Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, Chennai - 2009 (235) E.L.T. 282 (Tri.-Chennai). (iv) Orient Arts Crafts v. Commissioner of Customs (Prev.) - 2003 (155) E.L.T. 168 (Tri.-Mum.). (v) Commissioner of Customs (Prev.), Mumbai v. Noble Asset Co. Ltd. - 2008 (230) E.L.T. 22 (Bom.). 24. Shri Navneet, learned Addl. Commissioner (AR) appearing for the Revenue submitted that for all legal purposes as well as in the common understanding, Mumbai comprises of all areas as were hitherto covered within the two districts presently designated City of Mumbai and Mumbai Suburban District . Merely because for the sake of administrative needs an area having been re-designated into two parts, cannot form the basis to deny the applicability of law of the land to a piece of land with changed nomenclature for a specified purpose. He submitted that such division into two districts is only for the purpose of state Revenue administration and not other substantive reasons as can be understood from the fact that for P ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r the Air Cargo Complex at Sahar Airport and learned Advocate relied upon the various case laws in support of his contention that jurisdiction cannot be assumed and it should be conferred by the competent authority. 26.1 In the case of UOI v. Ramnarain Bishwanath (supra), the goods were imported and cleared at the Paradeep Port and seized by the customs authorities in West Bengal. The Hon ble High Court has held that it was for the customs authority at Paradeep to execute the proceedings against the respondent and not for the customs authority in West Bengal. In this case there was no such issue of jurisdiction of officers where particular place has been divided into two areas as contended by the appellant in case of Mumbai after its division of Mumbai into Mumbai City District and Mumbai Suburban District. Therefore, the facts of this case are distinguishable from the present case. 26.2 In the case of C.K. Geever (supra), the Additional Director General of Central Excise Intelligence (DGCEI) had issued a show cause notice under Section 28 of the Customs Act, which was held to have been issued without jurisdiction by the Tribunal. In this case, the Additional DGCEI was appoin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been relied upon by the Hon ble Member (Judicial) in his order to support his contention that Commissioner of Customs (Prev.) has no jurisdiction over Sahar Air Cargo Complex at Sahar Airport. In that case it was held by the Hon ble High Court that rights over territorial waters, continental shelf and contiguous zone from EEZ have to be exercised by sovereign nations i.e. Union of India and not by States consisting Union of India, whereas in the case before us both Mumbai City District and Mumbai Suburban District are part of the State of Maharashtra and the said decision was rightly distinguished by the Hon ble Member (Technical) in his order. I find that the learned Advocate, in his written submission, has stated that even though the facts are not exactly the same. Since, the facts are not similar to the present case, the ratio of that decision is not applicable to the present case. 27. The Hon ble Member (Judicial) has held that Sahar Air Cargo Complex at Sahar Airport falls in jurisdiction of Mumbai Suburban District and as per Notification No. 15/2002, Commissioner of Customs (Prev.) is having jurisdiction over the District of Mumbai, which itself does not exist in the r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
