Case Laws
Acts
Notifications
Circulars
Classification
Forms
Manuals
Articles
News
D. Forum
Highlights
Notes
🚨 Important Update for Our Users
We are transitioning to our new and improved portal - www.taxtmi.com - for a better experience.
⚠️ This portal will be discontinued on 31-07-2025
If you encounter any issues or problems while using the new portal,
please
let us know via our feedback form
so we can address them promptly.
Home
2011 (1) TMI 363 - AT - CustomsAppeal - Whether the impugned order is of an administrative order or a quasi-judicial order - In the earlier round of litigation where the permission of factory stuffing was denied to the appellant on negative report sent by the Jurisdictional Asst. Commissioner without looking into the report of the Asst. Commissioner the same was challenged before this Tribunal and this Tribunal remanded back the matter to pass a speaking order - the Commissioner has passed the order on an application filed by the applicant for grant of permission. If any order is passed against any representation made by the assessee the same become quasi judicial order and is appealable order. Factory stuffing of export goods - Shri Ramesh Bafna, father of the Director of the appellant firm is having shares in the appellant firm - As per law Shri Ramesh Bafna and M/s. RIIPL are two different legal entities - For the act of M/s. RIIPL Shri Ramesh Bafna has already been exonerated - If Shri Ramesh Bafna having any share in the appellant firm that does not make any adverse binding on the appellant firm. M/s. RIIPL wherein Shri Ramesh Bafna is a Director which was involved in fraudulent export also have no merits as Shri Ramesh Bafna has been exonerated by this Tribunal and there is no allegation found by the department against Shri Ramesh Bafna - As per Customs law there is no bar to run two firms from the same address denial of permission of factory stuffing on that premise is also not sustainable.
|