2004 (1) TMI 228

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Exports), the Deputy Commissioner of Customs, Review Cell (Sea) has filed the above mentioned appeal along with Stay petition and application for condonation of delay. The appeal has been preferred by the Commissioner of Customs (Port - Exports) in exercise of his power under Section 129A(2) of the Customs Act, 1962, against the order passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai-III Commissionerate. The ld. Consultant further submits that impugned order has been passed by an Executive Commissioner namely Commissioner of Central Excise-III Commissionerate and such an order can only be reviewed by the Central Board of Excise Customs in terms of Section 35E of the C.E. Act, 1944. He submits that inasmuch as there is no order passed .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ssed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai-III Commissionerate holding that Commissioner of Central Excise has no jurisdiction to issue a Show Cause Notice to demand Customs duty and hence the proper officer namely the Commissioner of Customs, Bangalore, only has to examine the matter and take appropriate action as per law to demand customs duty, if any payable by M/s. Panel, with reference to the imports made by them through Bangalore. The Commissioner of Customs, Bangalore has sent the file containing the Order-in-Original along with Show Cause Notice etc. to the Chennai Commissionerate since the imports were made through Chennai Customs. 5. As noted above, the Commissioner of Customs (Port - Exports) has given the authorisatio .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sioner of Central Excise, Chennai-III, Commissionerate and not by an appellate Commissioner of Customs. In terms of sub-section (2) of Section 129A of the Customs Act, the Commissioner of Customs may, if he is of the opinion that an order passed by the Appellate Commissioner of Customs under Section 128 of the Act, is not legal, direct the proper officer to appeal on his behalf to the Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) against such order. In this case as noted above, the order has been passed by the Executive Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai-III Commissionerate. The action of the Commissioner of Customs in authorising his Deputy Commissioner to file appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Central Excise, therefore, tantamounts to re .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X