TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (10) TMI 1423
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Cables Pvt. Ltd., Commissioner Of Customs, New Delhi, Jtpl Texmart Ltd., Virendra Kumar Khandelwal, Naveen Kumar Gupta, Prayag Fabrics, Anil Kumar Jain, Sanjeev Kumar Director, Chandra Textiles, Alok Agarwal, Rajendra Prasad Jain, Arun Kumar Dhandharia, Kamakshi Kraftex Pvt. Ltd., Saraswati Textiles, Rajendra Kumar Mittal Director, Saraswati Fabrics Ad-1, Shri Shyam Maheshwari Director, Nimbark Textile Mills, Capital Texfab Pvt. Ltd., Chandrakanta Singhal, Nimbarka Exportsgeet Govind Fabrics, Kapil Fabrics, Sameer Khandelwal, Kapil Sarawagi Proprietor, Bhawana Agarwal Proprietor Nimbark Exports Geet Govind Fabrics, V.k. Textiles, Samrat Exports, Shanti Kumar Jain, Shree Kundan Pvt. Ltd., Naveen Traders, Royal Crafts And Creations Pvt. Ltd.,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....018, In D.B. Custom Appeal 28/2018, In D.B. Custom Appeal 31/2018, In D.B. Custom Appeal 34/2018, In D.B. Custom Appeal 33/2018, In D.B. Custom Appeal 32/2018, In D.B. Custom Appeal 30/2018, In D.B. Custom Appeal 37/2018, In D.B. Custom Appeal 36/2018, In D.B. Custom Appeal 39/2018, In D.B. Custom Appeal 40/2018, In D.B. Custom Appeal 41/2018, In D.B. Custom Appeal 38/2018, In D.B. Custom Appeal 42/2018, In D.B. Custom Appeal 3/2018, In D.B. Custom Appeal 4/2018, In D.B. Custom Appeal 5/2018, In D.B. Custom Appeal 6/2018, In D.B. Custom Appeal 7/2018, In D.B. Custom Appeal 8/2018, In D.B. Custom Appeal 11/2018, In D.B. Custom Appeal 12/2018, In D.B. Custom Appeal 13/2018, In D.B. Custom Appeal 15/2018, In D.B. Custom Appeal 16/2018, In D.B.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h of Delhi High Court in case of Vipul Overseas Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Customs & Ors., CUSAA 57/2017 decided on 20th November, 2017. In that view of the matter, he contended that the view taken by the Tribunal is required to be reversed and the matters be to be admitted on the substantial questions of law framed above. Counsel for the respondent has strongly relied upon the decision of 4th July, 2018, wherein while considering the identical issue, the Karnataka High Court in case of Deepak M. Ganeyan vs. The Commissioner of Customs and Service Tax, Bangalore has observed as under:- "6. The Hon'ble High Courts of Mumbai, Telangana and Andhra Pradesh, however took a different view of the matter as noted by the learned Tribunal....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ndment and Validation) Act, 2011 dt. 16/09/2011, assigning the functions of proper officers to various DRI officers with retrospective effect. 7. Later on, i.e. for the period subsequent to the amendment, the issue of DRI officers having the proper jurisdiction to issue the SCN came up before the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Mangali Impex Vs. UOI [MANU/DE/1027/2016 : 2016 (335) ELT 605 (Del.)], inter alia, laying down that even a new inserted Section 28(11) does not empower either the officers of DRI or the DGCEI to adjudicate the SCN issued by them for the period prior to 08/04/2011. Thus it is seen that the said order of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court is in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. However, the sa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....said observations, the learned Tribunal has remanded back the case to the original adjudicating Authority to first decide the question on jurisdiction. However, the said question can be decided by the learned Adjudicating Authority only after the Hon'ble Supreme Court decides the case of Mangali Impex Ltd. (supra) arising from the Judgment of the Delhi High Court reported in 2016 (339) ELT A.49 (SC). The matter is thus, at this stage, pending before the said adjudicating Authority in which even the question of jurisdiction of the DRI officers or the original adjudicating Authority is yet to be decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The matter is, thus still pending before the original adjudicating Authority only. 7. Learned counsel....