Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Commissioner Of Customs, Chennai vs M/S.Brindha Enterprises on 7 January, 2010
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
SOUTH ZONAL BENCH AT CHENNAI
Appeal No.C/320/2008
[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.C.Cus No.119/08 dated 30.04.2008 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Chennai]
Commissioner of Customs, Chennai
Appellant
Versus
M/s.Brindha Enterprises
Respondents
For approval and signature:
Honble Ms. JYOTI BALASUNDARAM, Vice-President
1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see 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 the Members wish to see the fair copy of the Order? :
4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental Authorities? :
Appearance :
Shri C. Dhanasekaran, SDR Shri T.V. Suresh Kumar, Adv.
For the Appellant For the Respondents CORAM:
Honble Ms. Jyoti Balasundaram, Vice-President Date of hearing : 07.01.2010 Date of decision : 07.01.2010 Final Order No.____________ In this case, the Commissioner (Appeals) vide order dated 30.04.2008 had upheld confiscation of Copper scrap (Druid) under Section 111 (d) and (m) of the Customs Act, 1962 on account of violation of import condition and misdeclaration of description. His order was challenged by the importers by filing appeal no.C/180/2006 and vide Final Order No.882/2006 dated 15.09.2006, the Tribunal set aside confiscation under Section 111 (d) and since the confiscation under Section 111 (m) was not challenged, the case was remanded by the Tribunal to the lower appellate authority to readjudicate the quantum of fine and penalty. Against the Tribunals final order cited supra, Revenue filed CMA No.483 of 2009 which was disposed of by the Honble Madras High Court vide order dated 28.04.2009 upholding confiscation under Section 111 (d) since the goods are prohibited goods, and setting aside order of remand and setting aside fresh order passed by Commissioner (Appeals) on 30.04.2008, pursuant to the remand by the Tribunal.
2. Since the High Court has accepted the contention of the Revenue that the goods are liable to confiscation under Section 111 (d) of the Customs Act and set aside the order impugned in the present appeal, the appeal becomes infructuous and is accordingly dismissed. (Dictated and pronounced in open court) (JYOTI BALASUNDARAM) VICE-PRESIDENT ksr 07-01-2010 ??
??
??
??
1 2