2017 (1) TMI 1350

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....wing facts are required to be noticed. 2.1 It appears that the petitioner, on his arrival in India, was intercepted at Anna International Airport, Chennai, on 31.01.2015, by the Customs officers. The petitioner was subjected to search, which revealed that he was carrying 268 gms of gold, valued at Rs. 7,54,688/-. 2.2 Consequent thereto, a show-cause notice was issued, which led to the passing of the order-in-original, dated 17.04.2015. Via this order, the petitioner was given liberty to re-export the gold, on payment of redemption fine of Rs. 2,50,000/- along with penalty, in the sum of Rs. 60,000/-. 2.3 The petitioner, being aggrieved, preferred an appeal with the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals). 2.4 The Commissioner of Custo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....h Court has ruled that since the rank of the Revisional Authority and that of the Appellate Authority was the same, the order passed by the Revisional Authority, could not be sustained. The observations made by the Court in paragraphs 8 and 9 of the judgment, being relevant, are set forth below for the sake of convenience: "...8. In the present case, the impugned order was passed by the Joint Secretary to Government of India who was also Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs. Thus, the order-in-appeal as well as revisionary order had been passed by the officers of the same rank which is not permissible as per law. Adverting to the judgments relied upon by the learned counsel for the respondents, it amy be noticed that the said....