TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (12) TMI 315
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... The matter was accordingly adjourned to 13/09/2016. On that date also, learned Departmental Representative sought time stating that they would implement the order of the Tribunal or make efforts to get a stay order from the Honble High Court. On his submission, the matter was adjourned to 03/10/2016. On which date, learned Departmental Representative again stated that they would make efforts to get a stay order from the Hon'ble High Court. On such oral submission, the matter was adjourned to 17/10/2016. On that date it was informed that they would seek instructions from the department. The matter was kept as pass over to 18/10/2016. On which date, the Bench was informed that the appeal of the Revenue against the final order dated 21/04/2015 is listed in the cause list of Hon'ble High Court. Accordingly, the matter was adjourned to 25/10/2016 and again on 27/10/2016. Further it is to be noticed that when the Departmental Representative informed us on 03/10/2016 that they are seeking instructions, the office of the Commissioner (AR) wrote a letter to Principal Commissioner on 04/10/2016 as to the progress of the case before the Hon'ble High Court for which r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....plementation of the orders. The Tribunal should not therefore, as a matter of course, pass orders as have been passed on the Miscellaneous Application. We would expect that this much will suffice the purpose of both, the Revenue and the Tribunal. While Revenue is relying on the above observation of Hon'ble High Court, it is ignoring following observation of Hon'ble High Court made in the same order in para 8: 8. After hearing Mr. Jetly on this point and perusing the order passed by the Tribunal so also the questions of law, we are not inclined to grant the stay of the order of the Tribunal. The Tribunal has allowed the Appeal of the Respondent. The Tribunal's findings raised substantial questions of law. A particular finding or an observation based on understanding of the Tribunal of a provision of law must not visit the party like the Respondent with adverse consequences. The Tribunal's order can be given effect subject to the pending Appeal by the Revenue in such cases. Ordinarily, this would not require any application before the Tribunal or before this Court. It can be seen that the Hon'ble High Court has clearly stated that the Tribunal's order can be given effect sub....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rnment Counsel to that effect. 4.6 We are unable to understand the inaction of the lower authorities in mentioning the matter for stay in the Hon'ble High Court while seeking time from Tribunal on the same ground. It can be seen that the appeal was filed before the Hon'ble High Court on 29/09/2015. Despite promises made before the Bench, to mention the matter before Hon'ble High Court, no positive action has been initiated. Today a letter is produced by the learned Special Counsel as received from Shri Pradeep S Jetly, Advocate, who appeared on behalf of the Revenue. The said letter also does not give any indication as to what action has been taken by the Revenue from 29/09/2015 to till date to get the matter listed before the Hon'ble High Court at least for getting a stay order on the order passed by the Tribunal. It seems that the entire exercise of the Revenue from 06/09/2016 is to hoodwink the Bench on some pretext or another, with no intention of taking any action. 4.7 It is seen that there is a great apathy in revenue in dealing with cases relations to customs brokers. The Custom Broker Regulation....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... pending/under investigation in the Customs House and if there are any delays. However, the said data has not been submitted till date." There is an obvious resistance to providing the data. This creates a suspicion. It is obvious that some Customs Brokers suffer on account of such delays and some get benefit on account of such delays. Some custom broker, who have not committed any serious fraud and who ought not to be punished, get out of work for long periods during which the proceeding are delayed. On the other hand, the nefarious custom brokers, who ought to be punished, get the benefit of the lapses committed on account of delays. In either case, it is bad for the system. It is in this context, the CBEC has issued the circulars dated 8.4.2010. It is not unlikely that many of the delays are deliberate and intended to help the nefarious custom broker or harass the good ones. In this context, it is felt that this data is relevant. In exercise of powers under CESTAT Procedure Rules, 1982, we direct the Revenue to present the data regarding observation of various time limits prescribed under regulations. This data may be given in respect of cases taken up or pending in the Mumbai ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....2011 8.11.2011 Inquiry is still pending 13 SSS Sai Shipping Services Pvt. Ltd., 11/999 9.6.2011 22.6.2011 20.9.2011 20.9.2011 20.9.2011 26.12.2012 14 K.M. Commercial Services Pvt. Ltd., 11/907 30.8.2012 13.9.2012 2.11.2012 2.11.2012 2.11.2012 18.10.2013 15. RR Joshi Shipping & Forwarding Pvt. Ltd. , 11/486 8.11.2011 2.12.2011 25.1.2012 25.1.2012 25.1.2012 11.12.2012 It is seen that inquiries initiated in 2010/2011 are still pending in 2016. There is absolutely no respect for the CBEC circulars or the CBLR 2013. This data appears to be just the tip of the iceberg as the revenue is seeking further time of 8 to 12 months just to compile the data of other such files regarding delay in processing. This indicates a very serious state of affairs. The interim order seeking data was issued on 15.7.2016 and the Miscellaneous Application has been filed on 23.9.2016. In a period of 67 days, they have provided data of 15 cases. There appears to be reluctance in providing the dat....