2015 (10) TMI 1285

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t in sustaining the appeal on a ground that not considered in the impugned order? 2. Whether a miscellaneous provision of law can be invoked to permit a thing, which is prohibited by a specific provision? 3. Whether the Tribunal can exercise the discretion of the proper officer under Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962, especially when the proper officer has had no opportunity to exercise the same?" 2. Heard Mr.T.Chandrasekaran , learned counsel for the appellant/ revenue and Mr.Parthasarathy , learned counsel appearing for the first respondent. 3. The respondent/assessee had the benefit of exemption under Notification No.45/2002 Customs dated 22.4.2002 for debiting DEPB credit equal to the duty payable. The respond....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e CESTAT, the Tribunal agreed with the contention of the assessee that under Section 149, an amendment of the Bill of Entries was possible. Therefore, the Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to allow the assessee to carry out the amendment of the Bills of Entries. Aggrieved by the said order of CESTAT, the Revenue is before us. 7. If we strictly go by the questions of law framed, we would have no alternative except to answer them in favour of the revenue. The first question of law raised was as to whether the Tribunal could sustain an appeal on a ground that was not considered in the impugned order. Theoretically, our answer would be in the negative, that is in favour of the revenue. 8. Similarly, the second question of law is as ....