2014 (4) TMI 802

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Adv. ORDER 1. Heard Mr. Venkata Reddy, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. N. Anand, Amicus curie. 2. This Customs Appeal, filed by the appellant-Commissioner of Customs, is directed against the order dated 30.11.2004 passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, South Zonal Bench at Bangalore (for short 'the CESTAT'), in an appeal bearing Appeal No.C-146/....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nbsp;  "This appeal arises from OIA No. 29/2004 dated 27.02.2004 by which the Commissioner (Appeals) has allowed the departmental appeal filed before him by the Assistant Commissioner of Customs and remanded the matter for de novo consideration. The short question raised by the appellant is that the authorization in terms of section 129D(2) has to be given to such authority, who passed the Or....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n 129D(2), the authority who passed the order should be directed to file the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). While in the present case, the Commissioner of Customs has authorised the Assistant Commissioner to file the appeal who was not the authority who passed the Order in Original. In view of the judgment cited supra, the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) is not legal and prop....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....by learned counsel for the appellant was wrong and misplaced. 4. From bare reading of sub-section (2) of section 129D of the Act as it stood prior to 2006, it is clear as crystal that only an adjudicating authority could be directed/authorised to file appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), being "such authority", for determination of such points arising out of the decision or order as may be....