TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 1995X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... its of the case, from either side. In view of the admitted position and pending legal dispute before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, it is found that all these appeals are to be allowed by way of remand by setting aside the impugned orders. Reliance can be placed in the case of ITC INFOTECH INDIA LTD. VERSUS CC, NEW DELHI [ 2017 (8) TMI 1639 - CESTAT NEW DELHI] where it was held that It has been ruled by Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of Mangali Impex Ltd. Vs. Union of India [ 2016 (5) TMI 225 - DELHI HIGH COURT ] that the D.R.I. Officers are not competent to issue the show cause notice for the period prior to 08.04.2011. In similar such cases, various Benches of the Tribunal such as, Delhi, Chennai Calcutta have set asid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... C/S/41571/2013 and C/41823/2013 For the Appellant/s: Ms. Asmita A. Nayak, S/Shri Ranjeet Ranjan and Surender Reddy, Adv/s., Shri S. Muthuvenkataraman Adv. Shri Hari Radhakrishnan, Adv. For the Respondent: Shri B. Balamurugan, AC (AR) ORDER Per: B. Ravichandran These appeals are listed today for disposal of stay applications filed along with appeals [except for appeal at Sl.No.35]. All appeals are against six different impugned orders, though all were dated 20.05.2013 passed by Commissioner of Customs (Seaport Import), Chennai. These appeals that were pending in different Benches were transferred as per the directions of the Hon'ble President, CESTAT, New Delhi and accordingly, listed in Chennai. 2. The l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... objection with reference to jurisdiction to initiate proceedings, is admitted. As regards the objection of the Revenue, to list the appeals again for some other day, we note that in the face of the admitted facts as above, and the issue involved is one of preliminary legal point of issue, we note the appeal themselves can be disposed of, as there could be no submissions on merits of the case, from either side. In view of the admitted position and pending legal dispute before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, we find that all these appeals are to be allowed by way of remand by setting aside the impugned orders. The matter has to go back to the original authority in line with the decisions of the Tribunal in various similar cases. Some of these ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... officers to initiate demand action under Customs Act, 1962. Hence, the request is being made to set aside the present proceedings where the notice was issued by the DRI. On the other hand, Authorised Representative for the Department has justified the order passed by Commissioner of Customs and made a request to decide the matter on merit. We have heard both the parties and gone through the material available on record. From the record, it appears that the preliminary issue which emerges in the present appeals is regarding the jurisdiction of the DRI Officers to issue notice under the Customs Act. The assessee-Respondent had taken a stand that in terms of the Hon'ble Apex Court decision in the case of Commissioner of Cu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of India [2016 335 ELT 605 Del] , and the High Court inter alia, held that even the new inserted section 28 (11) does not empower either the officers of DRI or the DGCEI to issue the SCN or adjudicate for the period prior to 8.4.11. Thus, it is seen that the said order of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court is in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. However, it is further noticed that the said issue was also the subject matter of Hon'ble Mumbai High Court in the case of Sunil Gupta Vs. Union of India [2015 (315) ELT 167 (Bom) as also of the Hon'ble High Court of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh in the case of Vuppalamritha Magnetic Components Ltd. Vs. DRI (Zonal Unit), Chennai [2017 (345) ELT 161 AP] , taking a view cont ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Impex and then on merits of the case but by providing an opportunity to the assessee of being heard. Till the final decision, the status quo will be maintained. In the result, both the appeals are allowed by way of remand. 7. In view of the above discussion and analysis, all the appeals are allowed by way of remand and for decision by the original authority, in terms of the observation of the Tribunal. Consequently, the stay applications also get disposed of. 8. The learned counsel Ms. Asmita A. Nayak appearing for the applicants [i.e., at SL. Nos.1,2,5-6,12-13,20,27-29 And 33 of the table referred to above] further submitted that there is one more linked appeal, for which not stay application has been filed and is list as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
