9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (7) TMI 1066X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for finalization of assessment had gone in appeal to claim a particular Exemption Notification. Learned Commissioner (Appeals) at the stage of appeal vide his order dated 04.01.2016 observed as follows: "5. I have carefully gone through the case records and the submissions made in the Memo of Appeals and also submissions at the time of personal hearing. 5.1 Undisputed facts in the case are that all the Bills of Entry in question have been assessed by proper officer as per the details furnished by the appellant; and accordingly appellant has paid applicable duty under protest and cleared the goods. 5.2 Appellant has filed these appeals to get benefit of concessional rate of CVD at 1% on fulfillment the Condition No. 16 of Notificati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat Commissioner (Appeals) continue to have power of remand even after the amendment of Section 35(A) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 by Finance Wet, 2001 w.e.f 11.05.2001. This case of Prem Steels P. Ltd. has distinguished the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of MIL India Ltd. 2007 (210) ELT 185 (SC) and stated that on the question of remand, the Supreme Court only made a passing remark, and relied on the case of Medico Labs (supra) and the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in their decision in the case of Umesh Dhaimode-1998 (98) E.L.T. 584 (S.C.). 5.7 In the light of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I set aside the impuged assessment orders with a direction to the assessing authority for consideration of all ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essing authority. The full facts of the case being the above, it does not warrant any modification in the assessment orders issued by this office. Hence, any benefit claimed post completion of each assessment is outside the mandate of assessment which being an adjudication order, the adjudicating authority becomes functus officio. Hence, the remedy lies elsewhere. Therefore, discussing the merits of the submissions made during the PH shall serve no purpose. After considering all the facts, documents and provisions of law, I am of the considered view that this office is not a 'Proper Officer' to revisit any of the aforementioned assessments which are final assessment orders for all legal purpose and therefore, refrain from interferin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... amine or test any imported goods or export goods or such part thereof as may be necessary. (3) For verification of self-assessment under sub-section (2), the proper officer may require the importer, exporter or any other person to produce any contract, broker's note insurance policy, catalogue or other document, whereby the duty leviable on the imported goods or export goods, as the case may be, can be ascertained, and to furnish any information required for such ascertainment which is in his power to produce or furnish, and thereupon, the importer, exporter or such other person shall produce such document or furnish such information. (4) Where it is found on verification, examination or testing of the goods or otherwise that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ggrieved; (ii) There should be an order/decision (iii) Such order/decision should be passed by an officer lower in rank than Commissioner (Appeal) Now in case of self-assessed bill of entry, the proper officer may only verify the bill of entry which is self-assessed by the importer. Moreover, since the self-assessment has been done by the importer only, the self-assessed bill of entry cannot be considered as an order / decision of the officer and there cannot be any question of the importer being aggrieved against the officer. Hence, I find that the order passed by the lower authority is legal and proper. The appellant has relied on many case laws, which I don't find applicable in the instant case. In view of the above, I find ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rity to issue a fresh order as there was lack of cooperation by the department in providing all the relevant documents. The original authority also had the same predicament of not having the relevant records but overlooked that the self assessment orders were in any case set aside, continued to proceed and concluded that he is not competent, not being a proper officer to reopen the same. This is in complete defiance of order of Ist appellate authority. On appeal to the Commissioner (Appeals), in the second stage he also expressed opinion in his findings that a person has to be aggrieved by self assessment to litigate the matter further. We find that even this proposition is no more valid in view of the judgment cited by the learned Advocate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
