TMI Blog2008 (7) TMI 36X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed by Commissioner 2. As regard M.A No. 237/08 filed by the applicant Commissioner seeking to correct a typographical error in his earlier MA(COD) No. 280/07, the same is allowed correcting the month "December, 2005" which appears therein to be read as December, 2006. Consequently, the reference to "December, 2005" in the Tribunal's earlier Misc. Order No. M-174/ KOL /08, dated 9-6-08 [2008 (227) E.L.T. 161 (T)] is also corrected to read as 'December, 2006." Affidavit filed by Member, CBE C 3. The revenue involved in this case is over Rs. 8.41 crores. Hence, in the said Order dated 9-6-08, we had directed the Board to file an affidavit for the detailed reasons stated therein. It is an established principle that when a statutory functionary makes an order based on certain grounds its validity must be judged by the reasons so mentioned therein as held in Mohinder Singh v. Chief Election Commissioner - AIR 1978 SC 851. This is to prevent that an order bad in beginning may, by the time it comes to court on account of challenge get validated by additional grounds later brought out. Public orders publicly made in exercise of statutory Authority cannot be construed in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e safe to act on such affidavit evidence. If an affidavit suffers from mischief of lack of verification that renders the same inadmissible in evidence. This from the judicial pronouncement of the Apex Court in A.K.K. Nambiar v. UOI Ors. - 1969 (3) SCC 864. 7. Compulsion of production of evidence also flows from the requirement of Civil Procedure Code while exercising powers of Appellate Authority as required by the Customs Act, 1962. This has been precisely adopted in the present Appeal following the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab Haryana - AIR 1984 P H 382. Powers and duties being integrated with functioning of Tribunal, it can only well function exercising its power vested under Section 129C of the Customs Act, 1962. This follows from the decision of the Apex Court in Mohinder Singh v. Chief Election Commissioner - AIR 1978 SC 851. It also follows therefrom that cardinal principle of law is to do all such necessary acts to repair an injury to Revenue and make the remedy realizable. 8. We find that the purported affidavit filed by Shri B.K. Gupta, Member of the Board is in 5 pages with some annexures. It is seen from page 5 thereof (reproduced i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ke another week after which Shri Gupta will be free. To a query as to whether Shri Gupta's work cannot be attended to by any of the other Members of the Board for a day to enable Shri Gupta to appear before the Tribunal, Shri Chakrabarti states that Shri Gupta has taken casual leave for 3 days from 7-7-08 to 9-7-08 and would be able to appear in the last week of July 2008 or thereafter. Deposition by Dy. Secy., GOI 11. We take note of Shri Chakrabarti's depositions recorded below. He says he has no knowledge of Customs and Excise law. He is not aware of the source of Tribunal's power. He is not aware that he is a Secretary to the Central Board of Excise and Customs nor has he read the provisions of the Central Board of Revenue Act under which the Board has been created. He states that he is a Deputy Secretary to the Govt., of India and is working as such for the last 2 1/2 years. He admits that Senior Technical Officers do not have the same status as Under Secretary. 12. He says there are about 10 posts of Chief Commissioners and 48 posts of Commissioners vacant throughout India and that filling up vacancies in Kolkata region is difficult. He says policies made by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... above deposition of Shri Chakrabarti raises more questions than provides answers. It also indicates the state of utter confusion that is prevailing in regard to making statutory appointments for carrying out various statutory functions under the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Law. 'lie level of ignorance of the Key Personnel manning the administration side of an important statutory body like the Central Board of Excise and Customs vested with statutory powers and functions under the Indirect Tax Laws become self-evident when the deposition of Shri Chakrabarti is examined. Hence, his further deposition is discontinued as it leads us nowhere and is of no use. Time taken by CBE C for Review 16. The Registry was directed by us to make a random study of a few cases to find the time taken by the Board to review orders of Commissioners, before such power of Review was given to the Committee of Chief Commissioners. The details collected are as follows :- Appeal Nos. Appellant(s) Respondent(s) Order-in-Original No. Date No. and Date of Board's Review Order EDM-13/05 CCEx., Shillong Binnakandy Tea E ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
