TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (12) TMI 86
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s under the relevant provisions of the Customs Act. In the remaining appeals, the prayer of the Revenue is to enhance the quantum of penalties imposed on the respondents. The appellant is represented by the learned JCDR. A few of the respondents are represented by counsel. The respondent in one appeal (E/188/03) is represented by the party in person. There is no representation for the remaining respondents despite notice, nor any request of theirs for adjournment. We take up all the appeals for final disposal. 2. At the outset, one of the learned advocates submits that 16 appeals filed by the Revenue against the order-in-original No. 206 to 219/2002 ibid have already been dismissed by this Bench and, therefor....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....C/248/03 9 Transworld Shipping Services (I) Pvt Ltd C/176/03 Shipping Company C/260/03 10 Sudhakar Salve C/177/03 Employee of CHA ____ 11 M P Shah C/178/03 Manager of CHA ____ 12 J L Kochar C/179/03 Manager- Shipping Company C/247/03 13 DS Jagtap C/180/03 Employee CHA ____ 14 M V Nair C/181/03 Customs Incharge-CHA ____ 15 K V Gopal Krishnan C/182/03 Ex-Manager CHA, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eals of the Revenue attained finality inasmuch as it was not challenged by the department. In these circumstances, according to the learned counsel, the pending 16 appeals of the department mentioned in the third column of the above statement, against serial nos 1 to 09, 12, 15 and 16, 20 to 22 and 24 are liable to be dismissed. 4. The learned JCDR has contested the above submission of the counsel, by pointing out that no copy of the Tribunals final order dated 12.1.2007 was received by the Commissioner of Customs (Export), New Custom House, Mumbai and hence no remedial action by way of filing ROM application or statutory appeal against the said order could be taken. It is submitted that the Registry of this Bench did not sup....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nbsp; This document indicates that a postal article of the CESTAT addressed to the Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), NCH, Mumbai was registered at the GPO on 19.1.07. What is evident from these records is the fact that any certified copy of the Tribunals order dated 12.1.07 was not issued to the appellant (Commissioner of Customs (Export), NCH, Mumbai) in the Revenues appeals which were disposed of by the Tribunal on 12.1.07. The Assistant Registrar of this Bench ought to have taken greater care to ensure that a certified copy of the order was duly issued to the Commissioner of Customs (Export), NCH, Mumbai. Apparently, a copy was mistakenly sent to the Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), NCH, Mumbai. The Assistant R....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....out of 14 show-cause notices which were adjudicated upon by the Commissioner by a common order. According to the learned J.C.D.R., the present appeals of the revenue pertain to the remaining six show-cause notices and, therefore, these appeals merit independent consideration without regard to anything contained in the final order dated 12.1.07. It appears from the records that the 14 show-cause notices were issued to different parties including the present respondents on the basis of the results of common investigations. The Commissioner passed a common order in adjudication of these 14 show-cause notices. The Reviewing authority issued a common order reviewing the Commissioners order as against the present responden....