TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (10) TMI 2327
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... For the Respondent : Shri B. Balamurugan, AC (AR) ORDER Per D.N. Panda Learned counsel raises a preliminary point that when the Tribunal vide its order dated 7.10.2013 specifically directed in para 5 of the order as under, the authority below to whom direction was given did not comply to that direction. "5. Hence we set aside the impugned order and the matter is remanded to the Commissioner ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f. But that condition was not complied and the licence of the appellant was revoked. According to him the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Commissioner of Customs Vs. A.M. Ahmed & Co. in W.A. No. 371 of 2015 and M.P. No. 1 of 2015 held that the date of the notice issued by DRI shall be the date of offence report for calculation of limitation under Regulation 22 of CHALR, 2004. Once that ma....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ples were drawn contrary to law, the appellants would be estopped because their representative was present when the samples were drawn and they did not object immediately. This is a completely perverse finding both on fact and law. On fact, it has been more than amply proved that no representative of the appellant was, in fact, present at the time the Customs Inspector took the samples. Shri K.M. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... was made from the record. Record nowhere reveals issuance of the show-cause notice under Regulation 22. Revenue has also no answer to that aspect. We appreciate that when the matter came up first before Tribunal there was a categorical direction to follow the course of natural justice which is appreciated from the para quoted aforesaid. If the authorities below to whom direction was made failed t....