9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (8) TMI 1008X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e appellant was bound by this order of status quo passed by the Tribunal and could not have asked for the refund of the amount deposited by the appellant voluntary during investigation, which amount had been confirmed and appropriated by the order impugned before the Tribunal in the earlier round of proceedings. Appeal dismissed. - Customs Appeal No. 52381 of 2019 - FINAL ORDER NO.50715 /2022 - Dated:- 12-8-2022 - MR. DILIP GUPTA, PRESIDENT AND MR. P.V. SUBBA RAO, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) None for the Appellant Shri Rakesh Kumar, Authorized Representative of the Department ORDER This appeal was filed on September 30, 2019 and despite notice having been served upon the appellant on June 24, 2022, no one has appeared on be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iated as the appellant had already deposited the said amount during investigation. It is against this order that the appellant had earlier filed an appeal before this Tribunal. This appeal was heard on June 16, 2017 with seven other appeals. An issue that was raised by the appellants was regarding the jurisdiction of the Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) to issue the show cause notice. The operative part of the order passed by the Tribunal is reproduced below: 13. 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 is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... noticed that the Tribunal had also directed the parties to maintain status quo till the matter was decided afresh pursuant to the order passed by the Tribunal. It is this order dated March 19, 2018 that was assailed before the Commissioner (Appeals), who by order dated June 17, 2019 dismissed the appeal. 6. Even though learned counsel for the appellant has not appeared, we have perused the file and have also heard Shri Rakesh Kumar, learned authorized representative appearing for the department. 7. We are satisfied that the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) does not suffer from any infirmity so as to call for any interference by the Tribunal. 8. The appellant had not deposited the amount towards the pre-deposit and in any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
