9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 1118X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... [ 2016 (5) TMI 225 - DELHI HIGH COURT] is pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court as UNION OF INDIA VERSUS MANGALI IMPEX LTD. [ 2016 (8) TMI 1181 - SC ORDER] . Therefore, if such is the factual position, then the Tribunal ought to have kept the matter pending on its file instead of setting aside the adjudication order and remanded the matter back to the adjudicating authority and await the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Identical impugned order was tested for its correctness by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this court in COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (PORT) , KOLKATA VERSUS M/S. HALDIA PETROCHEMICALS LTD. [ 2019 (6) TMI 1650 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] . The appeal filed by the Revenue was allowed and, consequently, the appeal f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the file of the Tribunal to keep the same pending and await the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in an appeal filed against the decision of the High Court of Delhi in the case of Mangali Impex Ltd. vs. Union of India [2016 (335) E.L.T. 605 (Del.)]. Therefore, we exercise discretion and condone the delay. The application, GA/1/2020 [Old GA No:138/2020] is disposed of accordingly. RE: CUSTA/1/2020 This appeal filed by the Revenue under section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962 [the Act] is directed against the order passed by the Tribunal whereby the Tribunal allowed the appeal and set aside the order passed by the adjudicating authority and remanded the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer. The Revenue has raised th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8 were issued to the appellants by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence [' DRI' for short] and original adjudication order was passed on 14th October, 2014. The final order was challenged before the CESTAT, who have vide impugned order dated 14th July, 2017, remanded the matter back to the Adjudicating Authority to await the decision of the Supreme Court in Mangli Impex Limited [supra]. The appellants and respondents have assertively highlighted that the original order was passed after more than 6 years. Thus, remand to the original adjudicating authority at this stage, they submit, would cause prejudice and harassment to the appellants and respondents. The submission is that the contentions of the appellants should be decided ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
