Revenue Department cannot pass subsequent order in the matter which is already been adjudicated

The CESTAT, Ahmedabad, in NEERAJ SHARMA VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, KANDLA - 2023 (8) TMI 204 - CESTAT AHMEDABADset aside the order passed by the Adjudicating authority on that matter which is already been adjudicated and held such order as void-Ab-initio.

Facts:

Neeraj Sharma (“the Appellant”) was served with a Show Cause Notice dated March 28, 2018 (“the SCN”).

Thereafter, an order-in-originalwaspassed by the Adjudicating Authorityimposing the penalty of INR 25 Lakh under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962(“the Customs Act”).

The Appellant filed an appeal before the CESTAT against the order-in-original (“the Impugned Order”) contending that the impugned order is void ab-initio as the SCN has already been adjudicated by the Adjudicating Authority vide order dated June 30, 2014 and the appeal was already filed against the said order before the CESTAT, Mumbai.

The Appellant further submitted that issuance of second adjudication order is clearly not sustainable in law particularly when the appeals are against order-in-original dated June 30, 2014 are pending before the CESTAT, Mumbai.

Issue:

Whether the Revenue Department can issue SCN on the same matters which is already been adjudicated by the Adjudicating Authority?

Held:

The CESTAT, Ahmedabad, in NEERAJ SHARMA VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, KANDLA - 2023 (8) TMI 204 - CESTAT AHMEDABADheld as under:

• Observed that, the Impugned Order was already adjudicated by the Ld. Commissioner of Customs vide order-in-original No. 5/2013-14/CC(I)JNCH dated June 30, 2014 and is currently pending before the CESTAT, Mumbai.
• Held that, the present order passed by the Revenue Department is ab-initio void and illegal.
• Set aside the Impugned Order and clarified that the CESTAT, Mumbai is at liberty to deal with the appeals independently which are pending before them.

(Author can be reached at [email protected])