TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1994 (2) TMI 189
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....llants submitted that the impugned order is violative of the principles of natural justice inasmuch as the same was passed without affording the person an opportunity of being heard. It was further submitted that proceedings that were instituted culminated in the impugned order only in respect of M/s. O.K. Agencies pursuant to the direction of the High Court of Madras and during the pendency of the proceedings the appellant/petitioner represented to the Department that the proceedings relating to similar assessees in which the appellant/petitioner also has interest may be grouped together and disposed of. This plea was acceded to by the Collector of Customs. In this context the learned Counsel Shri Nankani placed reliance on the letter of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....appellant under the impugned order. The appellant/petitioner can agitate his rights to the claim in the pending penal proceedings against him before the authorities. The learned SDR further submitted that the impugned order has been passed only by reason of the time bound direction of the High Court of Madras in the Writ proceedings filed by M/s. O.K. Agencies in W.P. No. 19632/92, dated 15-2-1992 for a direction to the Department. The learned SDR submitted that in the absence of any duty liability on the appellant/petitioner under the impugned order and without any separate penalty against the petitioner/appellant under this order the petitioner has no right or locus standi to file appeal as an aggrieved person. It was therefore, submitted....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....petition, and within two weeks thereafter, they must issue the show cause notice to the party, if it is found necessary. On receipt of the reply from the party to the show cause notice, the enquiry shall be completed and adjudication order shall be passed within two weeks from the date of receipt of the reply. The Writ petition is ordered accordingly." The learned SDR also did not dispute the fact that no duty has been levied on the appellant/petitioner under the impugned order. We record the statement of Shri J.P. Gregory, the learned SDR in this regard and it is the contention of the Department that since there is no levy under the impugned order on the petitioner, the petitioner cannot claim to be an aggrieved person for preferring an a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... impugned order has been passed only against M/s. O.K. Agencies, we are inclined to hold that the appellant/petitioner is not an aggrieved person to sustain this appeal. When the appellant/petitioner has not been levied any duty, the question of filing the appeal as an aggrieved person does not arise. No penalty has also been levied on the appellant/petitioner. It would certainly be open to the petitioner/appellant to put forth all the contentions as are open to him under law in the penalty proceedings which are said to be pending including the very maintainability of the proceedings. We, therefore, for the reason set out above and on consideration of the entire materials on record and on the basis of the submissions made by the learned SDR....