TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 1332X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , the Commissioner strictly following the Regulation 20(1) issued notice dated 24.04.2015 - notice dated 24.04.2015 being a notice for holding an inquiry cannot be appealed against. As regard order dated 24.04.2015 the same is only for the appointment of the Inquiry Officer and Presenting Officer and the same was meant for those officers only. Therefore, the same cannot be treated as the adjudication order and the appeal against which is not maintainable before this Tribunal. Under the CBLR, 2013, appeal can be filed only against the order of suspension or revocation of CBLR in terms of Sec. 146(2)(g) of Customs Act, 1962. Since in the present case, neither any order for suspension or revocation of the License was passed, the present appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing authority may appeal to the Appellate Tribunal. The impugned order was passed by the Commissioner in the capacity of adjudicating authority, therefore the order is appealable before this Tribunal. He submits that the impugned order was passed under CBLR, 2013 and the said Regulation was made under Sec. 146 of Customs Act. Therefore, the order is appealable before this Tribunal. He submits that by the impugned order for initiation of inquiry, the Inquiry Officer was appointed whereas Regulation 20 of CBLR, 2013 provides 90 days for initiation of inquiry from the date of receipt of the offence report. In the present case the offence case was investigated in 2011 and show cause notice proposing penalty on the appellant was issued on 12. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ai 2013 (295) ELT 653 (Bom.) 4. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides. Today the matter is listed for maintainability. We find that the appellant has filed appeal against an order dated 24.04.2015 which is reproduced below: From the above order, it is clearly observed that this order was issued only for appointment of the Inquiry Officer and the Presenting Officer for inquiry of a case against the appellant. It is also noticed that the order was issued to both the officers Shri V. G. Naik, Asst. Commr. of Customs and Shri Tilak Raj Kudwal, Superintendent and only a copy was marked to the appellant. 5. We observe that it is an order for appointment of officers and the appellant cannot be aggrieved by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fore, the Commissioner strictly following the Regulation 20(1) issued notice dated 24.04.2015 7. In view of the above position we are the view that the notice dated 24.04.2015 being a notice for holding an inquiry cannot be appealed against. As regard order dated 24.04.2015 the same is only for the appointment of the Inquiry Officer and Presenting Officer and the same was meant for those officers only. Therefore, the same cannot be treated as the adjudication order and the appeal against which is not maintainable before this Tribunal. Under the CBLR, 2013, appeal can be filed only against the order of suspension or revocation of CBLR in terms of Sec. 146(2)(g) of Customs Act, 1962. Since in the present case, neither any order for suspens ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
