TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2008 (9) TMI 306
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....th the appeals are arising out of common order and therefore, both are being taken up for disposal. None appeared on behalf of the respondent No.1 despite of issue of notice. Company Secretary of respondent No. 2 requested for adjournment as he is out of town and is not in a position to argue this matter. I find that the ground of adjournment is not satisfactory and therefore the request for adjou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ls) whereby the adjudication orders were set aside. Hence the Revenue filed these appeals. 3. The learned Jt. CDR submits that no appeal lies against the order for recovery of supervision charges before the Commissioner (Appeals). He relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in Shree Pipes Ltd. v. UOI [1995 (79) E.L.T. 405 (Raj)] which has been followed by the Tribunal in the case ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f establishments/supervision charges which were recovered in terms of the condition of the bond. Therefore, such order cannot be appealable before the Commissioner (Appeals) or the Tribunal. In these circumstances, the imposition of penalty under Section 117 of the Customs Act is not justifiable as for administrative act the penalty cannot be imposed under Section 117 of the Customs Act. Therefore....