9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (7) TMI 1234X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... R. Periasami (Technical Member) For the Appellant : Hari Radhakrishnan, M. Karthikeyan, M. Kannan, Dr. S. Krishnanandh, Navin Gheewala, C.A. For the Respondent : M. Rammohan Rao, DC (AR) ORDER C/S/41770/2013 & C/41963/2013, C/S/41771/2013 &C/EH/41772/2013&C/41964/2013, C/S/41773/2013 & C/41965/2013, C/S/41774/2013 & C/41966/2013, C/S/41809/2013 & C/41986/2013, C/S/41895/2013 & C/42068/2013 P. K. Das (Judicial Member) 1. These applications are arising out of a common order and therefore all are taken up together for hearing. After hearing the matter at length, we find that the appeals may be decided at the stage of stay petition hearing. Accordingly, after disposing of the stay applications, we take up the appeals for disposal. 2. M/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ers after considering the contents of the DRI report. 5. We find that the Commissioner of Customs had passed OIO No.19798/2012 dt. 22.11.2012, OIO No.20684/2013 dt. 12.6.2013 and 20685/2013 dt. 13.6.2013 (present appeal). against which respective appeals were filed by the parties. The Tribunal by Final Order No.40105-40124/2014 dt. 22.1.2014 set aside the adjudication orders dated 22.11.2012 and 12.4.2013 and remanded the matter to the adjudicating authority with certain directions. 6. On a perusal of the final order dt. 22.1.2014, we find that High Sea Sellers namely M/s.Nupur Impex, M/s.Prachi Silks, M/s.Shreepal Silk & Sarees, M/s.Subham Enterprises & M/s.Trimurti International filed writ petition before the Hon'ble Madras High Cou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pears that importers M/s.Shree Maruti Impex had not filed any appeal against the impugned order. Now, it transpires that M/s.Shree Maruti Impex and other co-noticees filed appeals against the impugned OIO No.20685/2013 dt. 13.6.2013 against which the present appeals are filed before the Tribunal. 9. After considering the submissions of both sides and on perusal of records, we find that in the earlier Final order, the Tribunal remanded the matter to decide the ownership of the goods as claimed by High Sea Sellers. The relevant portion of the said Final Order dt. 22.1.2014 is reproduced below :- "8. In view of the above discussion, we direct the Adjudicating authority to decide the claim of the ownership of the seized goods as claimed by t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s also should be given an opportunity to defend their case before the adjudicating authority. 11. In view of that, we remand these appeals to the adjudicating authority to decide the claim of the ownership of the seized goods as claimed by M/s.Nupur Impex in terms of the order of the Hon'ble High Court on the basis of documents and provisions of Customs Act and thereafter to decide the case in respect of the other co-notices in accordance with law. Accordingly, all these appeals are allowed by way of remand. 12. Needless to say that the adjudicating authority shall give proper opportunity of hearing before decision. All the appellants are directed to co-operate with the adjudicating authority during the adjudication proceedings. The s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
