2022 (4) TMI 270 - HC - Customs

Court condones appeal delay under Customs Act 1962, directs CESTAT to decide on merits.

The Court condoned the delay in filing appeals under the Customs Act, 1962, as the question of law raised had been previously decided. Regarding the ... Validity of appellate remand to original adjudicating authority - Jurisdiction of Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) / Directorate of Revenue Intelligence to issue show cause notice - Decision on merits by the appellate authority - Effect of a stayed High Court judgment on subsequent proceedingsValidity of appellate remand to original adjudicating authority - Effect of a stayed High Court judgment on subsequent proceedings - Setting aside of CESTAT's order remanding the matter to the original adjudicating authority to await the Supreme Court decision in the Mangli Impex matter. - HELD THAT: - The CESTAT had set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter to the original adjudicating authority to decide jurisdiction after the Supreme Court decision in the Mangli Impex case. The High Court observed that the Supreme Court has stayed the operation of the Mangli Impex judgment and that coordinate benches have, in several matters, set aside similar remands and proceeded to decide appeals on merits. Consequently, the High Court set aside the CESTAT order of remand and directed the CESTAT to decide the appeals on merits rather than await the outcome of the stayed High Court judgment. The Court expressly refrained from expressing any opinion on the merits themselves and confined its direction to the appropriate course of adjudication by the appellate forum. [Paras 6, 7]CESTAT's remand order set aside and CESTAT directed to decide the appeals on merits instead of awaiting the Mangli Impex decision.Jurisdiction of Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) / Directorate of Revenue Intelligence to issue show cause notice - Decision on merits by the appellate authority - Requirement that CESTAT decide, on merits, the jurisdictional question whether the Commissioner of Customs (Preventive)/DRI is competent to issue the show cause notice, uninfluenced by the Mangli Impex judgment. - HELD THAT: - While not determining the merits, the High Court directed that the CESTAT must decide the question of jurisdiction - specifically whether the Commissioner of Customs (Preventive)/DRI had competence to issue the show cause notice - on merits. The Court clarified that this determination should be made without being influenced by the Mangli Impex decision, the operation of which is stayed by the Supreme Court. The appellate authority is free to take any view on the merits after affording the parties an opportunity to be heard. [Paras 5, 6, 7]CESTAT to decide the jurisdictional question on merits, uninfluenced by the stayed Mangli Impex judgment.Final Conclusion: The High Court set aside the CESTAT order of remand and directed the CESTAT to decide the appeals on merits, including the question of the preventive authority's jurisdiction to issue the show cause notice, without being influenced by the Mangli Impex judgment whose operation is stayed; no opinion was expressed on the merits. Issues:Delay in filing appeals under Customs Act, 1962Jurisdiction of Commissioner of Customs (Preventive)/Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI)Analysis:*Issue 1: Delay in filing appeals under Customs Act, 1962*The appellant filed applications seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeals under section 130(2A) of the Customs Act, 1962. The respondent did not object to the delay being condoned as the question of law raised in the appeals had already been decided by a coordinate bench of the Court in other matters. Consequently, the delay was condoned, and the applications were disposed of.*Issue 2: Jurisdiction of Commissioner of Customs (Preventive)/Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI)*The appeals were preferred by the revenue under Section 130 of the Act against an order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT). The CESTAT had remanded the matter to the adjudicating authority for determining the issue of jurisdiction after the Supreme Court decision in the case of Mangli Impex Limited. The Supreme Court had stayed the operation of the judgment in the Mangli Impex case. Several cases following the Mangli Impex judgment were set aside by coordinate benches of the Court, remanding them for adjudication on merit. The question of law framed in these matters was whether CESTAT was justified in passing an order of remand to decide the jurisdiction issue after the Supreme Court decision. The same question of law arose in the instant appeals. The Court set aside the CESTAT's order and directed it to decide the appeals on merits, including the jurisdiction issue of Commissioner of Customs (Preventive)/DRI, without being influenced by the Mangli Impex judgment. The Court clarified that it had not expressed any opinion on the merits, leaving it to the CESTAT to decide.In conclusion, the Court disposed of the appeals in the aforementioned terms, closing the pending applications with no order as to costs.