Appeal allowed after jurisdiction error; Central Excise Appeals directed to review merits

The appeal was allowed as the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) erred in rejecting it for lack of jurisdiction without transferring it to the appropriate authority. The Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) was also criticized for not considering the merits of the appeal. The judicial member found both decisions unsustainable and directed the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) to entertain and decide the appeal on its merits after providing the appellant with a hearing opportunity.

---

---

Issues:
Jurisdiction of the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) in rejecting the appeal without deciding on merit.

Analysis:
The appeal was against an order passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) rejecting it for lack of jurisdiction without addressing the merits. The appellant, engaged in manufacturing excisable goods, imported goods under concessional duty. Discrepancies were found in the quantity received compared to the invoice. The lower adjudicating authority confirmed differential duty, interest, and imposed penalties. The consultant argued that the appeal rejection was improper, citing precedents where appeals should be transferred to the correct authority. The Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) also rejected the appeal, claiming no provision for resubmission after disposal. The consultant argued for the appeal's consideration, referencing relevant tribunal decisions.

The AR defended the impugned order, but the judicial member disagreed. It was held that the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) erred in rejecting the appeal based on jurisdiction without transferring it to the appropriate authority. Similarly, the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) was criticized for rejecting the appeal without considering the merits. The judicial member found both orders unsustainable in law. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, directing the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) to entertain and decide the appeal on merit after providing the appellant with a hearing opportunity. The operative part of the order was pronounced in open court at the conclusion of the hearing.

---