Tribunal stresses thorough examination post-permission cancellation, directs enquiry into communication & oversight. Importance of proper communication & consideration highlighted.

Orient Glazes Ltd, Raj Surana, Nahar Colours And Coatings Ltd Versus Commissioner of Customs (Import), Nhava Sheva

Orient Glazes Ltd, Raj Surana, Nahar Colours And Coatings Ltd Versus Commissioner of Customs (Import), Nhava Sheva - TMI Issues:
1. Examination of the issue by the Commissioner.
2. Communication of cancellation of permission to the appellant.
3. Consideration of grant of permission dates by the Adjudicating Authority.
4. Enquiry regarding non-receipt of cancellation of license.
5. Appeal to the Agricultural Ministry against cancellation order.
6. Remand of the matter to the Registration Committee.

Analysis:
1. The judgment highlights the lack of examination by the Commissioner regarding the issue at hand. The order suggests that the Commissioner did not scrutinize the events post the cancellation of permission and failed to consider relevant allegations made by the Revenue. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of a thorough investigation to determine the impact of the cancellation of permission on subsequent imports.

2. The issue of communication of the cancellation of permission to the appellant is raised in the judgment. The Tribunal directed an enquiry to verify if the appellant was informed about the cancellation order dated 29/11/2005. The judgment underscores the significance of proper communication and its implications on the legality of imports made post such communication.

3. The Adjudicating Authority's failure to consider the grant of permission dates provided by the appellant is discussed in the judgment. The Tribunal pointed out that these aspects were overlooked and not factored into the decision-making process. This highlights the importance of considering all relevant information and documentation in such cases.

4. The judgment addresses the issue of the appellant's non-receipt of the cancellation of license and subsequent direction for an enquiry with the licensing authority. The Tribunal emphasized the need for a thorough investigation to establish whether the cancellation order was effectively communicated to the appellant, underscoring the importance of procedural fairness and due process.

5. The judgment discusses the appeal made by the appellants to the Agricultural Ministry against the cancellation order. It includes a detailed excerpt from the Appellate Authority's observations, emphasizing the chronology of imports and the discrepancies in import quantities vis-a-vis the permits issued. The Tribunal noted the implications of belated appeals and the need for valid import permits to regularize imports.

6. Lastly, the judgment mentions the remand of the matter to the Registration Committee following the appellate order of the Agricultural Ministry. The Tribunal instructed the adjudicating authority to inquire about the outcome of the remand and consider it in the re-adjudication process, highlighting the procedural steps to be followed post-remand for a comprehensive resolution of the matter.