9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (6) TMI 60X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation) situated at Mumbai, Chennai, Delhi and Kolkata as Commissioner of Customs (Adjudication) for the purpose of adjudicating cases as assigned to them by the Central Board of Excise and Customs from time to time. It has emerged from the affidavit filed by the respondent, that the Central Board of Excise and Customs vide order dated 10.11.2006 transferred the files relating to the Show Cause Notice dated 24.08.2001 i.e. the one in question, to the Commissioner of Customs (Adjudication) at Room No. 217, New Custom House. As explained in the aforesaid Affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents, Mr. Gurbans Singh the Commissioner of Central Excise (Adjudication) had been duly vested with the power of Commissioner Customs (Adjudication), an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... late Tribunal (CESTAT) have proceeded on the erroneous basis that the appellants/ applicants were named by Mr. R. N. Zutshi in his confessional statement. The further submission is that this Court also proceeded on the same basis while dismissing the appeals. 4. So far as this submission of the appellant is concerned, we find no merit in the same. 5. Although, the Adjudicating Authority, as well as the Appellate Tribunal have relied upon the confessional statement of Mr. R. N. Zutshi, and have inferred that the petitioners stand implicated therein, the same does not persuade us to review our judgment. This is for the reason that there was other overwhelming evidence in the form of mobile phone calls made between the appellants and the oth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e may also refer to the discussion in our impugned judgment in Para 37 while dealing with the same submission. We have observed in Para 37 of our judgement as follows: "37. Bhoormul (supra) is also authority for the view that the law does not insist upon an impossible threshold of proof to establish allegations in Customs proceedings and that if on probabilities the statutory authorities can establish evasion, the legal standards are adequately met with. Here, each of the appellants were implicated for their complicity not on the basis of solitary evidence only, such as confessional statement of R.N. Zutshi, but also other materials: phone call records during the various past occasions when the passenger couriers had landed; the presence ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CUSAA 34/2011 titled as Yash Pal vs. Commissioner Of Customs, is that the original orders have been passed by Mr. Gurbans Singh in his capacity as the Commissioner of Excise (Adjudication). The submission of Mr. Pahwa is that the jurisdiction to pass the order in original rested with the Commissioner of Customs (Adjudication) - which Mr. Gurbans Singh was not. 10. He has drawn our attention to the order passed by this Court on 12.08.2016, calling upon the respondents to file an affidavit, specifically pointing out the order by which Mr. Gurbans Singh was authorized to act as Commissioner of Customs (Adjudication). Mr. Pahwa submits that in response to the said order an affidavit has been filed by the respondents. According to him, the sa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rge of Commissioner of Central Excise (Adjudication). e. That assuming that the stand of the Petitioner that Gurbans Singh was posted as Commissioner of Central Excise (Adjudication), Delhi, even then he was fully authorised to adjudicate the cases assigned to the Commissioner of Customs - Delhi by virtue of Notification No. 1/2003-Cus.(N. T.) dated 03.01.2003." 12. He has placed reliance on the decisions of the Supreme Court in Canon India Private Limited Vs. Commissioner of Customs, 2021 SCC OnLine SC 200 in support of his submission that the issue of jurisdiction goes to the root of the matter. 13. Mr. Pahwa submits that the assignment of the case to the Commissioner of Customs (Adjudication) was required to be specifically made. We ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the purpose of adjudicating cases as assigned to them by the Central Board of Excise and Customs from time to time. 16. It has emerged from the affidavit filed by the respondent, that the Central Board of Excise and Customs vide order dated 10.11.2006 transferred the files relating to the Show Cause Notice dated 24.08.2001 - i.e. the one in question, to the Commissioner of Customs (Adjudication) at Room No. 217, New Custom House. As explained in the aforesaid Affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents, Mr. Gurbans Singh - the Commissioner of Central Excise (Adjudication) had been duly vested with the power of Commissioner Customs (Adjudication), and was authorized to adjudicate the show cause notice as he was the incumbent of the said r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
