Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Suraj Prakash Versus Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi

2015 (8) TMI 1282 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Maintainability - Whether there is a mistake on the face of records - Appellant contended that Tribunal failed to consider the vital fact and also the decision relied by the appellant, which amounts to an error apparent on the face of records - Held that:- the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the appellant on the charge of abetting smuggling activities culminated in dropping the charges and exonerating the appellant. This fact is seen to have been brought to the notice of the Tribunal .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

r exercise of jurisdiction of the Tribunal under Section 35C(2) for rectification. - Imposition of penalty - Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962 - Appellant submitted that on similar facts this Tribunal in Commissioner of Customs, Amritsar v. Parminder Jit Singh [2013 (7) TMI 377 - CESTAT NEW DELHI] has held that when disciplinary proceedings under CCS (CCA) Rules, 1995 are dropped, the imposition of penalty under Section 112 on same charge and same evidence cannot survive - Held that:- the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

, DR, for the Respondent. ORDER [Order per: Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (J)]. - The above ROM application is filed by the appellant in Appeal No. C/483/2007-CU(DB) alleging that there is an error apparent on the face of records in the Final Order Nos. C/A/53952-53958/2014-CU(DB), dated 15-10-2014, whereby the said appeal was dismissed. The issue involved is the imposition of penalty under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962. 2. The case against the appellant is that, while holding the post .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e Tribunal at the time of hearing. Moreover, the appellant filed a Misc. Application No. C/Misc. 52544/14-CU(DB), dated 1-5-2014, seeking permission to urge the aforementioned aspect as an additional ground. Along with the Misc. application a copy of the order of the departmental proceedings and also copy of the decision rendered in Commissioner of Customs, Amritsar v. Parminder Jit Singh - 2013 (293) E.L.T. 241 (Tri. - Del.) on identical facts was furnished. The learned counsel argued that the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ed a considered order after examining the submissions made at the time of hearing. 4. Heard both sides. The foremost issue to be analyzed is whether there is a mistake on the face of records as contended by the counsel for the appellant. In a catena of decisions it is settled that a mistake which is obvious and self evident is a mistake apparent from the records. The discovery of the mistake must not require long process or reasoning. Further a submission made on an issue if not considered, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version