9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (11) TMI 68X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... once the appeal is accepted on the file of the Tribunal after paying the requisite pre-deposit. The impugned order is very cryptic without there being a adjudication of the rights and liabilities of parties by the application of mind to the merits of the matter. While the First Appellate Authority, could have decided the matter ex-parte for non-prosecution, however it should not have been done at the first instance when the intimation letter was returned with the remarks left and moved . The appellant should not have been denied the opportunity for a personal hearing as required by the principles of natural justice without making a serious attempt to reach out to him, through his representative or through the department, lest the appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... partment issued Show Cause cum Demand Notice dated 6.9.2012 for recovery of an amount of Rs.3,31,091/- as the goods pertaining to Bill of Entry No. 2869391 dated 2.3.2011 were cleared at Tuticorin Port and does not pertain to the jurisdiction of Chennai Customs. Therefore, the sanction of refund towards the said Bill of Entry was sought to be recovered. In the meanwhile, aggrieved by the sanction of refund, the department filed an appeal before Commissioner (Appeals) and vide the impugned order, the Commissioner (Appeals) had directed recovery of the refund amount of Rs.3,31,091/- as the refund has been granted without jurisdiction. The department vide Demand Notice dated 14.1.2015 confirmed the demand for recovery of erroneous refund amoun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... thority and a Demand Notice dated 14/01/2015 has been issued for recovery of an amount of Rs.3,31,091/- erroneously granted, as recorded at para 6 of the said Notice, even prior to three months from the issue of the impugned order. 5. I find that as per Section 129A (3) of the Customs Act, 1962, an appeal can be filed before CESTAT within three months of the communication of the order, whether it is filed by the party or by the department. Thus, coercive action before completion of the appeal period and the crystallisation of the substantive rights and liabilities of either of the parties has adversely affected the appellants chances from getting relief from a higher Appellate forum. Board vide Circular No.788/21/2004-CX, dated 25th May, 20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the principles of natural justice without making a serious attempt to reach out to him, through his representative or through the department, lest the appellant be aggrieved with closure of the appeal, for unintended lapses. This is not to condone the laxity on the part of the appellant in not updating his new contact address, which is not appreciated. However substantive justice should not be denied on technical grounds without making visible efforts to reach out to the appellant. The impugned order hence merits to be set aside. 7. Moreover the Demand Notice which flows from the impugned order comes into jeopardy and cannot be implemented as being infructuous once the appellate order on which it is based is set aside. 8. I accordingly set ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
