9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 431X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dia [2016 (5) TMI 7 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] considering the validity of an order passed by the Revisional Authority of the Central Government in the Cadre of Joint Secretary to Government testing the correctness of the order passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) and while considering the validity of such an order, held that the cadre of Joint Secretary to the Government of India is equivalent to the cadre of Commissioner of customs (Appeals) and therefore, the Revisional Authority cannot sit in judgment against the order passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) - non-implementing order passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) on the ground that the revision was pending, cannot be countenanced. The petiti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he petitioner filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Chennai and the appeal was partly allowed by converting the absolute confiscation of the Foreign Currency viz., 13500 Euros and extending benefit of redemption under Section 125 of the customs Act on payment of fine of ₹ 2,00,000/-. The Appellate Commissioner upheld the absolute confiscation of Indian Currency and passed an order on 25.05.2016. The petitioner had requested the respondent to implement the said order. But, no action was initiated on the petitioner's representation, the petitioner is before this Court by way of this Writ petition. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has reiterated the factual submissions and prayed that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals). The operative portion of the order reads as follows; In the present case, the impugned order was passed by the Joint Secretary to Government of India, who was also Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs. Thus, the Order-In-Appeal as well as revisionary order had been passed by the Officers of the same rank, which is not permissible as per law. According to the judgments relied upon by the learned counsel for the respondents, it may be noticed that the said decision were based on individual factual situation involved therein. Thus, the respondents cannot derive any advantage from the said pronouncements. 8.The Special Leave petition filed against the above order in SLP(Civil) CC. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e amount and the Revenue, which has filed the revision, having lost before the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), it would be sufficient, if a bond is executed by the petitioner to secure the interest. 7.For all the above reasons, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the respondent to release the Foreign Currencies valued at ₹ 19,42,975/- on the payment of fine of ₹ 2,00,000/- and the petitioner shall execute a bond for the full value of the Foreign Currency and keep the bond alive to secure the interest by the Revenue. In the event, the Revenue succeeds before the Revisional Authority viz., the Central Government, the above bond may be encashed by the respondent within 15 days from the date on which the petitioner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
