No reformatio in peius limits Tribunal power: an assessee's own appeal cannot worsen confiscation without a departmental challenge.

Where only the assessee appealed against the Commissioner (Appeals) order allowing redemption of gold on payment of fine, the Tribunal could not restore the original absolute confiscation and place the appellant in a worse position. Because the Department neither appealed under Section 129A nor filed a cross-objection under Section 129A(4) of the Customs Act, the Tribunal's power under Section 129B(1) was limited to the order under challenge. The principle of no reformatio in peius applied, so the assessee's own appeal could not be used to aggravate his position.

---

---

Issues: Whether, in an appeal filed only by the assessee, the Appellate Tribunal could restore the original order of absolute confiscation and place the appellant in a worse position when the Department had neither filed an appeal nor a cross-objection against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals).

Analysis: The appeal before the Tribunal was filed by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals), which had permitted redemption of the gold on payment of fine. The Department did not invoke its appellate remedy under Section 129A of the Customs Act, 1962, and also did not file a cross-objection under Section 129A(4) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal's power under Section 129B(1) of the Customs Act, 1962 is confined to the decision or order appealed against. In such a situation, the Tribunal could examine only the assessee's challenge to the appellate order and could not restore the original adjudication order so as to worsen the assessee's position in his own appeal. The principle of no reformatio in peius applies, meaning that a person should not be placed in a worse position merely because he has filed an appeal.

Conclusion: The Tribunal erred in restoring the original order of absolute confiscation. The point was answered in favour of the assessee.

---