Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Commissioner Of Customs (Gen), Mumbai vs Cannon Shipping Co. Pvt. Ltd on 6 August, 2008
IN THE CUSTOMS EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL WEST ZONAL BENCH AT MUMBAI COURT No. II Appeal No. C/542/08 (Arising out Order-in-Appeal No. 93/2008/mch/ac/cha/2007-08 dated 25.2.2008 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Mumbai) For approval and signature: Honble Mr. M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial) Honble Mr.K.K.Agarwal, Member (Technical) ====================================================
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 Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the Order?
4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities?
Commissioner of Customs (GEN), Mumbai Appellant Vs. Cannon Shipping Co. Pvt. Ltd. Respondent Appearance:
Shri K. Lal, SDR for the appellant Shri P.C. Jain, Sr. Advocate for the respondent CORAM:
Honble Shri M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial) Honble Shri K.K.Agarwal, Member (Technical) Date of hearing : 6.8.2008 Date of decision : 6.8.2008 O R D E R No:..
Per: Shri M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial) This matter is listed by the registry for non-rectification of defect pointed out by the registry to the revenue as regards non-filing of authorisation of the Committee of Commissioners. Registry vide letter dated 30.7.2008 informed the Commissioner of Customs (Gen), Mumbai, New Custom House, Ballard Estate, Mumbai intimating him that the following defect is noticed in the appeal filed by them authorisation by Committee of Commissioners authorising the Commissioner to file the appeal against the order in appeal is not submitted along with the appeal.
2. In response to the letter written by the registry regarding the defects in the appeal, a letter was received from the office of the Commissioner of Customs, (Gen), New Custom House, Ballard Estate, Mumbai, reads as under:-
Please refer to your office letter no. C/542/08-Mum dated 05.06.2008 regarding defect in the Appeal filed on 21/05/2008.
In this regard, it is submitted that, the said Appeal has been signed by Commissioner of Customs (Gen) therefore, no Authorisation is required. Further, there is no Order-in-Original passed in the present case. Secondly, four sets of attested copies of the Order-in-Appeal has already been forwarded to you on 21.05.2008.
As required another four attested copies of Order-in-Appeal No. 93/2008/MCH/AC/CHA/2007-08 dated 25.02.2008 and AC/CHAs letter F. No. S/6-449/60 Admn (CHA)/1831 dated 21.01.2008 is enclosed. The same may be accepted. Please acknowledge the receipt.
3. Provisions of Section 129A(2) of the Customs Act reads as under:-
(2) The Committee of Commissioners may, if it is of opinion that an order passed by the Appellate Commissioner of Customs under section 128, as it stood immediately before the appointed day, or by the Commissioner (Appeals) under section 128A, is not legal or proper, direct the proper officer to appeal on its behalf to the Appellate Tribunal against such order.
4. Despite the above provision being so clear and unambiguous, we are surprised to note that the office of the Commissioner of Customs has intimated to the registry that no authorisation is required for filing the appeal. This is contrary to the provisions in Section 129 (2) of the Customs Act, 1962.
5. It is suffice to say that this is a wrong interpretation of the statute; we dismiss the appeal filed by the revenue as defective. Order may be given by dasti to the respondent.
(Dictated in Court) K.K.Agarwal M.V. Ravindran Member (Technical) Member (Judicial) sr 3