9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 1740X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rred by a newly constituted Committee of Commissioners, who vide Review Order dt. 8.8.2017 have held that the impugned order passed by the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) is not legal and proper and accordingly, directed the concerned officer for filing of appeal before the Tribunal. In the impugned Review Order, no such statutory provisions were mentioned, which empowers the authorities to again review the order, which was already reviewed earlier by the competent authorities. Once, a review committee has taken a decision not to file the appeal before the Tribunal, then in such circumstances, they become functus officio inasmuch as such Committee of Commissioners has no power to review its decision and such a review on re-examination of facts o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... peal No. 87104 of 2017, 87105 of 2017, 87107 of 2017, 87109 of 2017, 87108 of 2017 - A/88547-88551/2018 - Dated:- 14-12-2018 - HON BLE S.K. MOHANTY, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) AND HON BLE MR. SANJIV SRIVASTAVA, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Shri Bhushan Kamble, Authorized Representative for the Appellant Shri Bharat Raichandani, Advocate for the Respondent ORDER PER: S.K. MOHANTY Revenue has filed these appeals against the impugned order dt.31.05.2016 passed by the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals-I), Pune. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the respondent herein had exported Metallurgical Gibbsite Bauxite from Kelshi Port to China, as per ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed the present appeal inter alia, on the ground that assessment done by the original authority based on the price actually payable as per the formula prescribed under the contract is the correct transaction value for the purpose of determination of the duty liability. Pursuant to the appeals filed by the Revenue, the respondent also filed the Cross-objection in terms of Section 129 A(4) ibid. 3. The Ld. AR appearing for the Revenue reiterated the grounds urged in the appeal memorandum. 4. On the other hand, the Ld. Advocate appearing for the respondent, at the outset, submitted that the impugned order passed by the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) was reviewed by the Committee of Commissioners and vide Review Order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted Committee of Commissioners, who vide Review Order dt. 8.8.2017 have held that the impugned order passed by the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) is not legal and proper and accordingly, directed the concerned officer for filing of appeal before the Tribunal. In the impugned Review Order, no such statutory provisions were mentioned, which empowers the authorities to again review the order, which was already reviewed earlier by the competent authorities. Once, a review committee has taken a decision not to file the appeal before the Tribunal, then in such circumstances, they become functus officio inasmuch as such Committee of Commissioners has no power to review its decision and such a review on re-examination of facts or position of law cannot ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
