Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Usha Shipping Agency vs Commissioner Of Customs, Mumbai on 5 June, 2008
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
WEST ZONAL BENCH AT MUMBAI
COURT NO.1
APPEAL NO.C/115 & 116/07
(Arising out of Order-in- Original No. S/14-4-37/95-P SD/INT/N.S.P.U./6A/95 dtd. 30.7.1996 passed by the Commissioner of Customs(P), Mumbai )
For approval and signature:
Honble Jyoti Balasundaram, Vice President
And
Honble A.K.Srivastava, Member(Technical)
============================================================
1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see : No the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?
2. Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the :
CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?
3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : seen of the Order?
4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental : Yes authorities?
============================================================= Usha Shipping Agency Shri A.K.Singh :
Appellant VS Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai Respondent Appearance Shri H.R.Shetty, Advocate for Appellant Shri P.K.Katiyar, Authorized Representative (DR) CORAM:
Ms. Jyoti Balasundaram, Vice President And Mr.A.K.Srivastava, Member(Technical) Date of decision 05/06/08 ORDER NO.
Per : Jyoti Balasundaram On hearing both sides on the appeals against imposition of penalty of Rs. 5 lakhs on the CHA and Rs. 2.5 lakhs on Shri A.K.Singh, its proprietor, we find that the appeals filed by the importers against duty demands and penalties, and by other noticees against the same impugned order (Appeal Nos. C/171,172/97, C/123 to 126, C/175.1006 to 1008/98 and C/36/99) have already been disposed of by way of remand to the jurisdictional Commissioner for fresh decision by the order reported in 2006(193)ELT 300. We are informed by both the sides that pursuant to the remand order, only one show cause notice out of three covered by the Tribunals order, has been re-adjudicated, while fresh orders in respect of the remaining appeals have not yet been passed. Since the connected cases have already been remanded, we set aside the impugned order in so far as it relates to the present appellants and remit the case to the jurisdictional Commissioner alongwith the cases already remanded by the Tribunal order cited supra. Fresh orders are to be passed after extending a reasonable opportunity to the appellants of being hearing in their defence.
3. Appeals are thus allowed by remand.
A.K.Srivastava Member(Technical) Ms. Jyoti Balasundaram Vice President pv 2