Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2019 (12) TMI 299

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sions in the impugned order in original. However, without considering such decisions or the import of such decisions, the objection relating to the jurisdiction, has been disposed off, merely by observing that this is a case of mis-declaration and therefore, the authorities will have jurisdiction over the matter. Since, this is an issue, which goes to the root of the jurisdiction, it will not be appropriate to relegate the petitioner to alternate remedy. Besides, we find that there is virtually no consideration as such, of the objection as to the jurisdiction, in the present case. Matter remanded to the Commissioner of Customs (Import), Mumbai to re-consider the objection as to the jurisdiction, as raised by the petitioner - petition .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d on this matter. 7. The petitioner had specifically relied upon the judgment of the CEGAT in the case of Samtel Color Limited Vs. Collector of Central Excise, Meerut 2000 (126) E.L.T. 1256 (Tribunal) and yet another decision of the CESTAT in the case of Cosmo Ferrites Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise Chandigarh 2014 (308) E.L.T. 633 (Tri.-Delhi). Placing reliance on both these decisions, in fact, the contention raised on behalf of the Revenue was that the Commissioner of Central Excise, before whom, the bond had been furnished by the parties, alone, had jurisdiction to issue notice and to institute proceedings in the matter, which was accepted by the CESTAT. 8. Mr. Ferreira, the learned Counsel for the pe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... to why the decisions are not applied or as to why the decisions can be distinguished in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 12. The only discussion that is found is at para 204 h. (page 202 of the paper book), which reads as follows: h. I do agree that the jurisdictional Central Excise Authority would have the jurisdiction to recover duty under Section 28 of the Customs Act for failure to comply with the conditions of Bond but the instant case is about the mis-declaration at the instant of import and therefore the jurisdiction for recovery of duty which otherwise would have been recovered but for the mis-declaration at the instant of import, will perforce lie with the jurisdictional authorities at the place .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates