Tax Management India. Com
                        Law and Practice: A Digital eBook ...

Category of Documents

TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Case Laws Acts Notifications Circulars Classification Forms Manuals SMS News Articles
Highlights
D. Forum
What's New

Share:      

        Home        
 

TMI Blog

Home List
← Previous Next →

2019 (12) TMI 134

..... Tax Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal), rejecting the appeal instituted by the Appellant herein against the order made by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Mumbai - HELD THAT:- It is obvious that very taking up the Appeal by the Tribunal on 19th April, 2007 was an exercise in excess of jurisdiction. Since the Appeal had already been disposed of by the order dated 10th July, 1998, there was really no occasion for taking up such appeal for reconsideration. It is obvious that such taking up of the Appeal was a result of miscommunication. It is obvious that the factum of disposal of the Appeal by order dated 10th July, 1998 was not brought to the notice of the Tribunal, either by the SDR or the staff of the Tribunal - Impugned order set aside. .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

..... ls that in fact, by an order dated 10th July, 1998, the appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) had, in fact, been allowed inter alia by enhancing the final penalty. The operative portion of the order dated 10/07/1998 reads thus : 3. On consideration of the submission made, we find that this Bench of the Tribunal has while dealing with the similar issue of M/s Archana International Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai in its Final Order No. 3820/97 WZB dt.22.9.97 held that fine of 100% of the assessable value will be appropriated in these cases. The Tribunal has also held that a penalty in these cases of about 10% of the value would be appropriate. The issue in these appeals is only in respect of the quantum of fine .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

..... nnected appeals. Although the Special Defence Representative (SDR) did appear before the Tribunal on the date when such appeal was taken up for hearing i.e. 19.04.2007, the Tribunal was not informed about the order dated 10th July, 1998, by which date, the appeal was finally disposed of. It is possible, as contended by Ms. Desai, that the SDR was unaware of the order dated 10th July, 1998, made almost 9 years earlier. The Tribunal, by the impugned order, on this occasion, dismissed the Appellant's appeal by the impugned order dated 19th April, 2007. Hence, the present Appeal by the Appellant herein. 7. From the records, it is obvious that very taking up the Appeal No.C/841/1997 by the Tribunal on 19th April, 2007 was an exercise in exce .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

 

 

← Previous Next →

 

 

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || Database || Members || Refer Us ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.
|| Blog || Site Map - Recent || Site Map ||