2010 (1) TMI 554

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....g the present applications, submits that he had argued in the course of stay hearing that the adjudication had travelled be yond show cause notice. After hearing of the matter, order was passed. But the clarification issued by DGCA Authorities on 15-12-2009 which is annexed to Modification Application as Exhibit-B in response to appellant's letter dated 14-12-2009 was not before the Tribunal. According to the contents of this letter, a Non-Scheduled Operator having NSOP (Passenger) can conduct charter operations as per para 9.2 of Civil Aviation Requirements Section 3, Series C, Part III as reproduced below:- "9.2 Non-Scheduled operators can conduct chartered/non-scheduled operations for transportation by air of persons, mail or goods. I....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... reported in 2004 (163) E.L.T. 150 (Bom.) submits that no application for review in the grab of prayer for modification can be entertained by Tribunal since CESTAT has no power to review its own order. So also he relies on the decision of Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of CCE Bangalaore-III v. Mc Dowel! & Co. Ltd. reported in 2005 (186) E.L.T. 145 (Kar). 4. To the proposition of Revenue as above, learned Counsel objects submitting that the facts and circumstances of each case are different and he submits that the DGCA clarification forming part of Misc. Application was not subject matter of the case referred to by Revenue as above. 5. We have carefully considered the submissions of both sides and tried to find out whethe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hese two basic documents were relied by Customs Authority for grant of customs duty exemption. But clarification of DCCA was not the basis. The clarification which touches root of the matter was not before us when we heard the stay applications. Therefore, any reconsideration shall amount to review of decision calling for elaborate argument of both sides and that is possible in the course of regular appeal hearing. The factual aspect before us at the time of hearing of stay application was whether the flight licensed for operation by the appellant was rightly used as per the licensing permission and terms thereof and whether the appellant fulfilled the conditions of customs notification. We make it clear that prima facie case was considered....