TMI Blog2009 (11) TMI 939X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arrival with the full cargo at the anchorage, thus the obligation under the bill of lading had been duly discharged. However, the Petitioner, steamer agent, was visited with a show cause notice dated 15.7.1999 from the Assistant Commissioner, Customs alleging that the vessel had short landed a quantity of 332.658 Mts. The Petitioner submitted a detailed reply on 9.8.1999 and sought for certain documents and clarifications for verification before proceeding further in the matter. However, the Petitioner-s contentions were rejected and an order was passed imposing penalty of ₹ 8,35,000/- at twice the amount of import duty payable on the cargo. AR Aggrieved by the said order, the Petitioner preferred an Appeal before the second Res ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ces, the Writ Petition has to be allowed quashing the order passed by the First Respondent. 4. Per contra, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents pointed out that in the face of the order passed by this Court dismissing the Wirt Petition W.P.No.1442 of 2005 dated 17.6.2009, the present Writ Petition also has to be dismissed or posted along with the Writ Appeal preferred therein. On the question o limitation, learned Counsel for the First Respondent submitted that having reg to the view expressed by the revisional authority, namely, the First Respondent as to the condoning of delay, there are no merits in the Writ Petition and the same has to be dismissed. He the learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner and the learned Counse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rmined by such order does not exceed five thousand rupees. Explanation FOR the purposes of this sub-section. -order passed under Section 128-A -included an order passed under that Section before the commencement of Section 40 of the Finance Act, 1984-, against which an Appeal has not been preferred before such commencement and could have been, if the said Section had not come into force, preferred after such commencement, to the Appellate Tribunal. (1-A) The Commissioner of Customs may, if he is of the opinion that an order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) under Section 128-A is not legal or proper, direct the proper officer to make an Application on his behalf to the Central Government for revision of such order. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o them, the Revision Petition was presented only in the month of January 2003. Going by Section 129-DD of the Customs Act, by this time, the condonable period of even three months had expired. Hence, even on the date of presentation of the Revision, the Revisional Authority had no jurisdiction to receive the same, even for the purpose of condoning the delay. The order passed by the First Respondent, now under challenge before this Court, hence, has to be held as one without jurisdiction. 7. Learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents pointed out that since the matter relates to Revenue, some leniency may be shown in the matter of condoning the delay. The said question arises if and when the authority concerned had approached the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 05 dated 17.6.2009. Considering the issue now raised by the Petitioner particularly with reference to lack of jurisdiction in terms of Section 129-DD of the Customs Act and on the admitted facts that the Respondents had approached the Revisional Authority only on the expiry of even the condonable period under Section 129-DD of the Customs Act, I have no hesitation in quashing the order, which is beyond the jurisdiction of the First Respondent, hence, has to be viewed void ab initio. In the above circumstances, even though this Court has upheld the order of the Revisional Authority in the other Writ Petition, I am not persuaded to adopt the same course, having reg to the issue raised and argued by the Petitioner as to the authority of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
