2016 (6) TMI 661 - AT - Customs

Appeals Dismissed for Lack of Maintainability Stresses Proper Procedures and Authorities

The Tribunal dismissed the appeals on the grounds of lack of maintainability, emphasizing the importance of adhering to prescribed procedures and ... Appeal against the letter dated 21.10.2015 addressed by the Assistant Commissioner (RRA), Customs - proper appellate forum - Held that:- mere addressing a letter to the Commissioner , irrespective of whether the commissioner is the proper officer or otherwise, the communication/decision of the Asst. Commissioner, in response to such letter of the Appellant, confer on them the right to file Appeal provided under Section 129A of CA,1962. - Appeal dismissed. Issues: Jurisdiction of Appellate Tribunal under Section 129A of CA, 1962Analysis:The issue in this case revolves around the jurisdiction of the Appellate Tribunal under Section 129A of the Customs Act, 1962. The Ld. A.R. for the Revenue contended that the appeals filed against the letter dated 21.10.2015 by the Assistant Commissioner (RRA), Customs are not maintainable before the Tribunal as the proper forum for such appeals is the Commissioner (Appeals). On the other hand, the Ld. Advocate for the appellants argued that since the decision was communicated by the Assistant Commissioner, it should be considered as that of the Commissioner of Customs. However, the Tribunal found no merit in this argument, emphasizing that the functions of officers are specifically defined under the Act and Rules. The Tribunal noted that the letter did not mention that the decision was communicated on the direction of the Commissioner of Customs. Therefore, the mere act of addressing a letter to the Commissioner does not confer the right to file an appeal under Section 129A of the Customs Act, 1962.Conclusion:Ultimately, the Tribunal dismissed the appeals on the grounds of lack of maintainability. The decision highlights the importance of adhering to the prescribed procedures and authorities designated under the law when filing appeals, emphasizing the need for clarity and specificity in communication regarding decisions to determine the appropriate forum for appeal.