TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (9) TMI 440
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dent before us. That was directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Customs (General), Mumbai dated 18-8-2011. 3. It is submitted by Mr. Pradeep S. Jetly, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Revenue before us that the Tribunal was considering the application for stay of the order passed by the Commissioner of Customs (General), Mumbai and impugned in the appeal. However, the Tribunal took up the appeal itself for final hearing and disposed it of by a cryptic order. The Tribunal has rendered contradictory and inconsistent findings. If the Tribunal was of the opinion that the respondent was denied a fair and reasonable opportunity to defend itself, then, the Tribunal should have restricted its finding and conclusion....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....equally to the respondent to deny the same. Instead, the Tribunal has rendered perfunctory findings and conclusions. It is in one breath held that the Investigating officers whose cross-examination was sought for by the Customs House Agent, never presented themselves for cross-examination during the inquiry proceedings thereby denying the respondent before us reasonable opportunity to prove his version or to substantiate his defence. The documents have been referred to and in Mr. Jetly's complaint neither of them have been considered extensively leave alone their contents, before recording their opinion that none of the charges imputed have any basis. Therefore, he submits that the appeal deserves admission and on the substantial questions ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of admission. It proceeded to dispose of the same finally. It is clear that when the appeal was being decided finally, the Tribunal relied only on the record produced by the respondent and not by the adjudicating authority. Thus, the complete record and proceedings were never called for. Secondly, the Tribunal if satisfied that principles of natural justice have been violated, then should have restricted its finding and conclusion only to that issue. The Tribunal then was not competent to express any final opinion on the merits of the charges. The Tribunal in doing that has clearly exceeded its jurisdiction. It has made observation which can be said to be conclusive and causing serious prejudice to the Revenue. The Revenue has produced sev....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in not assigning cogent and satisfactory reasons and omitting to refer to entire material, the Tribunal has misdirected itself in law and exceeded its jurisdiction as the Appellate Court?" 8. With the consent of the Advocates, we have heard this appeal finally. After we have recorded the fact that the Tribunal was not justified in law in adopting the course that it adopted, that both sides are agreed that the order passed by the Tribunal, should be quashed and set aside and the appeal should be restored to file of the Tribunal for being decided afresh and in accordance with law. We, therefore, quash and set aside the impugned order dated 22-5-2012 and restore Appeal No. C/760/2011 to the file of the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appe....