9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (5) TMI 1322X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2020 (5) TMI 475 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] where it was held that in view of the fact that the learned Tribunal has clearly protected the interest of both the Revenue as well as the Assessee by directing the Assessing Authority to keep the matter pending and maintain status quo till the Hon'ble Supreme Court decides the appeal of the Revenue in the case of Mangli Impex, filed against the decision of the Delhi High Court, we do not find any reason to interfere with the decision of the Tribunal, as in our opinion, no question of law arises for consideration in this appeal. Following the latest decision in THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS VERSUS SHRI SANKET PRAFUL TOLIA [ 2021 (6) TMI 432 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] , which are squarely covered by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to issue show cause notice under Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962 whether the CESTAT is correct in remanding the appeal? (ii) Whether Tribunal is empowered to remand the case without deciding the issues raised therein on the ground that jurisdiction of the officer to issue show cause notice is under dispute? 3.The respondent(s) herein approached the CESTAT, by filing appeals as against the order dated 31.10.2009 passed by the Commissioner of Customs, Chennai, questioning the jurisdiction of the officials of the DRI, who have not been designated as proper officers under the Customs Act, 1962 during the relevant point of time, to issue show cause notices. According to the respondent(s), the show cause notices have been issued by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s, w.e.f. July 6, 2011, the Additional Director General, DRI was prospectively appointed as 'proper officer' for the purpose of Section 28 of the Customs Act. Hence, from 06.07.2011, ADG-DRI has been empowered to issue demand notice under Section 28. 6. Subsequently, sub-section 11 was inserted under section 28 of the Customs (Amendment and Validation) Act, 2011 dated 16.09.2011, assigning the functions of proper officers to various DRI officers with retrospective effect. 7. Later on, i.e., for the period subsequent to the amendment, the matter i.e., the DRI officers having the proper jurisdiction to issue the SCN or not had came up before the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Mangali Impex vs. Union of India (2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... yed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported as 2016 (339) ELT A 49 (SC). Finally, the Hon'ble High Court has granted liberty to the petitioner by observing that petitioner is permitted to review the challenge depending on the outcome of the appeals filed by the UOI in the Supreme Court against the judgment of the Court in the case of Mangali Impex Limited. 11. By following the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of BSNL (supra) as well as by considering totality of facts and circumstances, we set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the original adjudicating authority to first decide the issue of jurisdiction after the availability of Hon'ble Supreme Court decision in the ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... enue as well as the Assessee by directing the Assessing Authority to keep the matter pending and maintain status quo till the Hon'ble Supreme Court decides the appeal of the Revenue in the case of Mangali Impex , filed against the decision of the Delhi High Court, we do not find any reason to interfere with the decision of the Tribunal, as in our opinion, no question of law arises for consideration in this appeal. Accordingly, we dispose of the appeal, with no order as to costs. 7.However, in the subsequent decision in the case of Commissioner of Customs, Tuticorin v. Sanket Praful Tolia , decided on 04.06.2021 in CMA.(MD)Nos.433 to 437 439 to 455 of 2021, wherein, the orders impugned are identical to that of the present case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 9;ble Supreme Court. It was also made clear that the appellant - Department shall not initiate any coercive action against the respondents/assessees. The operative portion of the said Judgment reads as follows: 3. In these appeals, the Revenue has raised the following substantial questions of law, (i) as to whether the Tribunal was right in allowing the appeals on the ground that the jurisdiction issue has to be decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the appeal filed against the decision of the High Court of Delhi, in the case of Mangali Impex vs. Union of India reported in 2016(335)E.L.T.605(Del.); (ii) The next question is as to whether the Tribunal was right in allowing the appeals and simultaneously directing stat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
