Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Commissioner Of Customs (Preventive), ... vs M/S. Dharam Impex P. Ltd on 26 November, 2010
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL WEST ZONAL BENCH AT MUMBAI Application No. C/s/1038/09 In Appeal No. C/617/09 (Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. 50/Mumbai-III/2009 dated 18/3/2009 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Mumbai -III) For approval and signature: Honble Shri Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) ============================================================
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 : Yes
of the Order?
4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental : Yes authorities?
============================================================= Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), Mumbai.
:
Appellants VS M/s. Dharam Impex P. Ltd.
Respondents Appearance Shri S.M. Vaidya, JDR Authorized Representative (SDR) None For respondent CORAM: Shri Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) Date of decision : 26/11/2010 ORDER NO. Per : Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial)
Revenue is in appeal against the impugned order wherein the Commissioner (Appeals) has asked by the impugned order to the Assistant Commissioner to verify the claim of the respondent from the relevant records and pass the order accordingly.
2. After hearing the learned DR, I find that the appeal can also be disposed of at this stage. Accordingly, after dispensing with the stay application the appeal is taken up for final hearing. The learned DR submitted that w.e.f. 11.5.2001, the powers of Commissioner (Appeals) has been taken away by the Finance Bill 2001 to remand the matter to the original adjudicating authority has held by the Honble Apex Court in the case of MIL India Ltd Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Noida reported in 2007 (210) E.L.T. 188 (S.C.).
3. Heard and considered.
4. It is true that the power of Commissioner (Appeals) to remand the matter has been taken way by the Finance Bill 2001 w.e.f. 11.5.2001. In this case, the Commissioner (Appeals) has asked to concern Assistant Commissioner to verify the claim of the respondent from the records and to pass the order accordingly. As the Commissioner (Appeals) cannot remand the matter to the adjudicating authority in that event, the impugned order is modified with the direction to the Assistant Commissioner to verify the claim of the respondent from the relevant records and give the record to the Commissioner (Appeals) to take the decision accordingly.
5. With these observations, the appeal is allowed by modifying the impugned order by way of remand. Stay application is also disposed of in the above manner.
(Dictated in court) (Ashok Jindal) Member (Judicial) Sm 2