TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (6) TMI 1870
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rit Petition. 2. The brief facts necessary for the disposal of the Writ Appeal are as follows: The appellant company had bought imported gold bullion (free of duty) from M/s. Bank of India and manufactured gold ornaments for export in terms of the foreign trade policy that was in vogue. A consignment covered by Shipping Bill No. 7996621 dated 14.08.2017 was intercepted by the Customs Authorities, who assessed the purity of gold and weight of gold in the jewellery and found it to be less than what was declared in the shipping bill. The Department, therefore, issued Ext.P1 show cause notice in relation to the current consignment of gold jewellery that was intercepted and also in relation to 71 earlier shipping bills under cover of which....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nst Exts.P3 and P4 orders on merits. Ext.P10 is the judgment of this Court in the Writ Petition aforementioned. 4. Pursuant to Ext.P10 judgment, the First Appellate Authority proceeded to reconsider the appeals preferred by the appellant company, its Managing Director, and the Department against Exts.P3 and P4 orders. This time around, the First Appellate Authority passed Exts.P11 and P12 orders dismissing the appeals preferred by the appellant company and its Managing Director but allowing the Department appeals on a point that was never urged therein, after dismissing the Department appeal on the grounds urged in the appeal. In a sense, what the First Appellate Authority did was to enhance the redemption fine and penalty imposed by the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mar the learned Standing counsel for the Customs Department, on behalf of the respondents. 7. At the outset, it is the submission of the learned Senior counsel for the appellants that while under normal circumstances, the learned Single Judge cannot be faulted for relegating an assessee to the alternate remedy under the statute, in a challenge against original orders passed in assessments/penalty proceedings, in the instant case, the orders impugned have the effect of mulcting the appellant assessees with an exaggerated demand of penalty and redemption fine that would greatly prejudice them while resorting to the alternate remedy of preferring a further appeal before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal as directed by t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n of the learned Senior counsel that it was, therefore, not open to the First Appellate Authority to unilaterally expand the grounds of appeals of the Department and proceed to adjudicate the same and grant the Department a relief, which it did not have the authority to seek, and which in fact was not sought in the appeals. 9. On a consideration of the rival submissions, we must point out at the outset that the aforementioned points specifically urged by the learned Senior counsel were not averred either in the Writ Petition or in the Writ Appeal. The said points were urged only before the First Appellate Authority and do find a place in the proceedings before the First Appellate Authority. When this was pointed out to us during the cons....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....als were based on the Review Cell's recommendations on similar lines, and therefore, could not have been unilaterally expanded by the Department or by the First Appellate Authority. This aspect is borne out from the statutory provisions of Section 129 D(2) of the Customs Act. 10. We must, in this context, also notice the Department's response as contained in their affidavit dated 24.02.2025. The stand of the Department in response to the points urged by the appellants as above is that notices were issued to the assessees, who raised the question of penalty under Section 114 and 114 AA, and the Appellate Authority had examined the issue in totality and found it appropriate to enhance the penalty under the provisions of the Customs....