Mr. Sultan Allaudin Shaikh vs Commissioner Of Customs

Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal29 April 2015

CitationAppeal No. C/45 and 46/2001

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

The Tribunal may dismiss an appeal in limine, without hearing the merits, where the appellant has not pursued the appeal over a long period and the amount of duty or penalty involved is below the statutory monetary threshold, the Tribunal exercising the power conferred by the second proviso to Section 129A(1) of the Customs Act, 1962.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, WEST ZONAL BENCH AT MUMBAI

COURT No. I

Appeal No. C/45 and 46/2001

(Arising out of Order-in-Original No. CCP/ADJ/ACB/19/2000 dated 22.09.2000 passed by Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), Mumbai)

For approval and signature:

Honble Mr. M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial) Honble Mr. P.S. Pruthi, Member (Technical)

================================================

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 : Seen of the Order?

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

Mr. Sultan Allaudin Shaikh Mr. Imran Shaikh Appellant Vs.

Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai Respondent

Appearance:

None for appellant Shri M.S. Reddy, Dy. Commissioner (AR) for respondent

CORAM:

Honble Mr. M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial) Honble Mr. P.S. Pruthi, Member (Technical)

Date of Hearing: 29.04.2015 Date of Decision: 29.04.2015

ORDER NO

Per: M.V. Ravindran

When these two appeals were called out none appeared on behalf of the appellant. Heard learned D.R.

2. We find that these appeals are directed against the impugned order which has imposed penalties of Rs.15,000/- on Shri Imran Shaikh and Rs.25,000/- on Shri Sultan Allaudin Shaikh under the provisions of Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. We find that the appellants have not been prosecuting these appeals from 2001 onwards and the main appeal of M/s. Lacure Pharmaceuticals (P) Ltd. has already been rejected by the Tribunal. Exercising the powers of 2nd proviso to Section 129A (i) of the Customs Act 1962, as the amounts involved are less than Rs.50,000/-, we reject the appeals.

(Dictated in Court)

(P.S. Pruthi) Member (Technical) (M.V. Ravindran) Member (Judicial)

nsk

1 2

This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.

Research this judgment with Miss Lucy

Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.

Try Miss Lucy free