Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the Appellate Tribunal had jurisdiction to entertain the appeal when it related to goods exported outside India without payment of duty and whether the papers were required to be returned for presentation before the Central Government.
Analysis: The appeal concerned cotton fabrics exported without payment of duty and claimed to fall under Rule 13 of the Central Excise Rules. Proviso (1)(c) to Section 35-B of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 excludes from the Tribunal's appellate jurisdiction orders relating to goods exported outside India without payment of duty. On that footing, the Tribunal held that the statutory bar applied. It also noted that jurisdiction cannot be conferred by consent and that, where a matter is filed in the wrong forum, the papers must be returned for presentation before the proper forum.
Conclusion: The Tribunal had no jurisdiction and the appeal lay before the Central Government; the appeal papers were directed to be returned for filing the proper revision application.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a statutory proviso excludes appeals concerning goods exported outside India without payment of duty, the appellate tribunal lacks jurisdiction and must return the papers to enable proceedings before the competent forum.