https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53868 The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai held that the demand of duty issued by the Collector of Customs (Preventive) instead of the proper officer of Bombay Custom House under Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962 was without jurisdiction. The Tribunal set aside the adjudication order and directed the issues to be determined by the jurisdictional Commissioner of Customs-in-charge of the group that assessed the Bill of Entry at Bombay Port. The Tribunal emphasized the need for natural justice in the proceedings and instructed the Collector of Customs to hear the appellants on all open issues and make a suitable decision. The appeals were allowed accordingly. en-us Tue, 04 Jan 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 15 Oct 2010 16:18:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53868 The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai held that the demand of duty issued by the Collector of Customs (Preventive) instead of the proper officer of Bombay Custom House under Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962 was without jurisdiction. The Tribunal set aside the adjudication order and directed the issues to be determined by the jurisdictional Commissioner of Customs-in-charge of the group that assessed the Bill of Entry at Bombay Port. The Tribunal emphasized the need for natural justice in the proceedings and instructed the Collector of Customs to hear the appellants on all open issues and make a suitable decision. The appeals were allowed accordingly. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 04 Jan 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53868