Commissioner Of Customs (Import), ... vs M/S. Plus Point Enterprises

(Arising out Order-in-Original No. 8/2006/CAC/CC(I)/AKP dated 27.01.2006 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Import), Mumbai)

For approval and signature: Honble Mr. M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial)

1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see No the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?

2. Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the No CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?

3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy Yes of the Order?

4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental Yes authorities?

Commissioner of Customs (Import), Mumbai Appellant

Vs.

M/s. Plus Point Enterprises Respondent

Appearance:

Shri S.J. Sahu, AC (AR) for the appellant None for the respondent

CORAM:

Honble Mr. M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial)

Date of hearing : 08.05.2015 Date of decision : 08.05.2015

O R D E R No:..

This appeal is field by the Revenue against the Order-in-Original No. 8/2006/CAC/CC (I)/AKP dated 27.01.2006.

2. None appeared on behalf of the respondent. Since the matter was listed at least thrice, I take up the appeal for disposal in the absence of representation from the respondent.

3. Heard ld. Departmental Representative and perused the records.

4. On perusal of the records, I find that the Adjudicating Authority has confirmed the demands raised on the product Vitamin B1 under the provision of Section 18 of the Customs Act, 1962 and has not imposed any interest holding that the goods were provisionally assessed. It is a case of the revenue that the question of provisional assessment of Vitamin B1 will not arise as the same was concealed in the consignment of paraffin wax and sought to be smuggled. During the last hearing, copy of the show-cause notice was called for from DRI Mumbai which is produced by the ld. Departmental Representative.

5. On perusal of the show-cause notice, I do find merits in the arguments of the Departmental Representative that the show-cause notice is issued for demanding the customs duty interest thereof and imposition of penalties on the respondent as per proviso to Section 28 (1) of the Customs Act, 1962. Normally, I would have considered the entire appeal on merits. Since the Adjudicating Authority has not considered the issue of the demand under Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962, I hold the issue needs reconsideration by the Adjudicating Authority.

6. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I set aside the impugned order keeping all issues open for the Adjudicating Authority to decide after following the principles of natural justice.

7. Appeal allowed by way of remand.

(Pronounced in Court)

(M.V. Ravindran) Member (Judicial)

//SR

3