9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (3) TMI 499X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... espondent. [Order per : G.A. Brahma Deva, Member (J) (Oral)]. - This is an appeal filed by the party accompanied with the stay application with reference to Order-in-Appeal No. 2/2002(H-I) Cus., dated 10-5-2002 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Hyderabad. 2. After hearing for sometime with reference to the stay petition filed by the party, we find that the matter its ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... de by the Commissioner (Appeals) as appeared in Para 2 of the impugned order which is as follows : - "2. I have examined the position. It is observed that the impugned notice of attachment was issued by the Assistant Commissioner (TRC), Hyderabad-I Commissionerate under Section 142 of the Customs Act, 1962, after receiving the certificate in Appendix-I from the Assistant Commissioner of Cust ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... should have preferred an appeal against the Order-in-Original No. S8(a)/580/90-AP, dated 28-7-98 wherein the customs duty has been confirmed by the Assistant Commissioner. Instead of doing so, the appellants have preferred an appeal against the notice of attachment issued by the Assistant Commissioner (TRC), Hyderabad-I Commissionerate. Since the appellants have failed to file an appeal against t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ds since the Order-in-Original as such, has not been served on the party. We are also not in agreement with the observations made by the Commissioner (Appeals) that all order against the attachment order is not an appealable order. Since the order was passed by the Assistant Commissioner as a quasi-judicial authority, the Commissioner should have entertained such appeal. In the facts and circumsta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
