TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 1522X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... V. Padmanabhan, Member (Technical) Sh. A. Samad, Sh. Tariq Ahmad Sh. A. K. Sharma, Advocates for the appellant Sh. Govind Dixit, AR for the respondent ORDER The present appeals have been filed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Customs, Jodhpur. 2. Heard Sh. A. Samad, ld. Advocate for the appellant and Sh. Govind Dixit, ld. AR for the Revenue. 3. During course of arguments, both the sides agreed that in the instant case, notice was issued by the Commissioner of Customs (Prev.) Jodhpur, who is not the competent authority as per the ratio laid down by the Hon ble High Court in the case of Mangli Impex vs. Union of India -2016 (335) ELT 605 (Delhi). 4. In this connection, we note that similar iss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fficers in terms of section 2(34) of the Customs Act, 1962. 5. It is also seen that after the declaration of law by the Hon ble Supreme Court (Supra), the provisions of section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962 were amended with effect from 08.04.2011 vide Finance Act, 2011. 6. It is also noticed that in order to overcome the situation created by the judgment of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Sayed Ali (supra) , Notification No. 44/2011-Cus (NT), dated July 6, 2011 was issued by the CBEC, assigning the functions of the proper officer to various officers (including Additional Director General, DRI) mentioned in the notification, for the purposes of Section 28 of the Act. Thus, w.e.f. July 6, 2011, the Additional Director General, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... flicting decisions of various High Courts (Supra), finally the matter reached to Hon ble Supreme Court who on 07/10/2016 granted the stay of operation of the judgment passed by the High Court of Delhi. Thus the issue is sub-judice before the Hon ble Supreme Court [ 2016-TIOL-173-SC-CUS / 2016 (339) ELT A 49 (SC) ]. 11. It may be mentioned that recently, the Hon ble High Court of Delhi in the case of BSNL Vs. UOI vide writ petition no. C/4438/2017 and CM No. 19387/2017 has dealt with the identical issue where the notice was also issued by DRI. The Hon ble High Court of Delhi has considered the judgment in the case of Mangali Impex Ltd. Vs. UOI which is stayed by the Hon ble Supreme Court reported as 2016 (339) E.L.T. A 49 (SC) . Fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
