Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2012 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2012 (4) TMI 93 - AT - CustomsApplication for restoration of the appeal - Learned Counsel for the respondent confirms that the electronic copy of the order placed by Revenue is correct. In view of material facts recorded in para 2 to 9 of order of Hon ble High Court there is no appeal existing in the record of the Tribunal calling for disposal and the matters have come to an end - Learned Counsel for the respondent confirms that the electronic copy of the order placed by Revenue is correct - Held that the order passed today shall be subject to the decision of the Hon ble High Court of Delhi on the restoration application of the appellants , if any, as has been averred by the learned Counsel for them - Miscellaneous Applications praying for adducing additional evidence are misconceived and fail
Issues:
a) Jurisdiction of CESTAT to restore dismissed appeals b) Legality of the impugned order passed by CESTAT c) Interference with the due process of the High Court d) Compliance with Section 129B(2A) of the Customs Act, 1962 Analysis: a) The issue of jurisdiction was raised concerning whether CESTAT could restore appeals dismissed four years ago when the order had merged with the High Court's final order. The Revenue argued that the Tribunal ceased jurisdiction after passing an order, making the appeals non-restorable. b) The legality of the impugned order was questioned, focusing on whether CESTAT had the power under Section 129 of the Customs Act, 1962 to pass the order without review powers. The argument highlighted that there was no pending appeal for restoration at the time of the impugned order. c) Concerns were raised about interference with the due process of the High Court, emphasizing that the CESTAT's order had merged with the High Court's order, and there was no basis for recalling the order. The issue of breaching the law by entertaining appeals contrary to the High Court's decision was also discussed. d) Compliance with Section 129B(2A) of the Customs Act, 1962 was examined to determine if the impugned order was contrary to the provisions of the Act. The section outlines the powers and timelines within which the Appellate Tribunal must hear and decide appeals, ensuring adherence to legal procedures and timelines. The judgment clarified that the order passed by the Tribunal was subject to the decision of the High Court on the restoration application of the appellants. It was emphasized that the matters had concluded based on the facts recorded in the High Court's order. Additionally, non-compliance with previous Tribunal orders led to the dismissal of appeals, making the current applications for additional evidence misconceived and unsuccessful. The Registry was directed to inform the High Court for further action, highlighting the relationship between the Tribunal and the High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution.
|