Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
) Shri Bhimendra Kumar Goyal vs Commissioner Of Customs (Prev.) West ... on 26 March, 2014
CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
EAST ZONAL BENCH: KOLKATA
1-3) CUSTOMS APPEAL NOs.C/A/149-151/2012
AND
4) CUSTOMS APPEAL NO.C/A/225/2012
(ARISING OUT OF ORDER-IN-ORIGINAL NO.10/CUS/CC(P)/WB/2012 DATED 07.05.2012 PASSED BY COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS(PREV.),WB,KOLKATA)
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURES OF
DR. D.M.MISRA, HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER
DR. I.P.LAL, HONBLE TECHNICAL MEMBER
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?
1) SHRI BHIMENDRA KUMAR GOYAL
2) SHRI RAHUL GOYAL
3) SHRI VIVEK AGARWAL
APPELLANT (S)
VERSUS
COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (PREV.) WEST BENGAL, KOLKATA
...RESPONDENT (S)
4) COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (PREV.) WEST BENGAL, KOLKATA APPELLANT COMMISSIONER VERSUS SHRI BHIMENDRA KUMAR GOYAL ...RESPONDENT APPEARANCE:
SHRI S.BHATTACHARYA, ADVOCATE ASSISTED BY SHRI R.N.BANDYOPADHYAY, CONSULTANT FOR THE APPELLANT(S);
SHRI D.K.ACHARRYA, SPECIAL COUNSEL FOR THE REVENUE. CORAM:
DR. D.M.MISRA, HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER DR. I.P.LAL, HONBLE TECHNICAL MEMBER Date of Hearing & Decision:26.03.2014 ORDER NO.FO/A/75120-75123/2014 Per Dr. D. M. Misra Heard both sides.
2. Three Appeals are filed by the Assessees namely, Shri Bhimendra Kumar Goyal and S/Shri Rahul Goyal and Vivek Agarwal and the 4th Appeal is filed by the Revenue. All the Appeals are taken up together for disposal, as the same have been filed against a common Adjudication Order passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Prev.), WB, Kolkata.
3. We find that both sides are aggrieved by the said Order.
4. Ld. Advocate for the Appellants submits that in similar situation, appeals were remanded to the Adjudicating Commissioner for fresh decision, and he requests for similar Orders in these cases also.
5. The ld. Special Counsel for the Revenue has no objection to such remand, but prays that a time-frame be fixed for disposal of the Appeals.
6. We find that in similar situation, this Tribunal earlier in the case of Singh Brothers Exim Pvt. Ltd. vs. CC (Port), Kolkata (Order No.S-38-39/A-49-51/KOL/08 dated 08.01.2008) and Automatic Small Scale Industries vs. CCE, Kol-II (Order No.A-61-70/KOL/2012 dated 08.02.2012) remanded the matters, when both the assessees as well as the revenue were questioning the legality and propriety of the order passed by the adjudicating authority. Hence, following the said precedent, we set aside the impugned Order and remand the cases for fresh decision on merits. The ld. Adjudicating Authority shall grant a reasonable opportunity of hearing and also take into account the Grounds of Appeals advanced by the Appellants as well as the Revenue, before this Tribunal, while passing the order afresh on merit. We take note of the apprehension expressed by the ld. Special Counsel for the Revenue, and direct the ld. Commissioner to decide the issue afresh, within a period of 12(twelve) weeks from today. We expect that the Appellants would not take frivolous and unnecessary adjournments and co-operate with the process of adjudication. Appeals are thus allowed by way of remand.
(Pronounced & dictated in the open court.)
Sd/- Sd/-
(I.P.LAL) (D.M.MISRA)
MEMBER(TECHNICAL) MEMBER(JUDICIAL)
DUTTA/
3
C/A/149-151 & 225/2012
3