TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (1) TMI 222
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s follows: "1. Whether the Tribunal was correct in traversing beyond the scope of the appeal preferred by the appellant and pass the impugned order usurping the powers of the adjudicating authority to order the absolute confiscation of the goods, even when the adjudicating authority had allowed the re-export of the goods on payment of redemption fine imposed in the order impugned in the said appeal? 2. Whether the Tribunal was correct in holding that the appellant had committed fraud against the revenue, even when the dispute admittedly involved no demand for any customs duty, but only concerned the non-production of import license, when admittedly, no Bill of Entry for the clearance of said goods was filed under Section 4....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....yee of DHL China; that indisputably the ownership and title to the goods did not pass to the consignee; they have admitted that it was an error that they had filed SEZ Bill of Entry with the revised documents without carrying out the amendment with chem Co. Ltd and Consignee name as M/s. Antoine and Becouerel Organic Chemical Co., Chennai, seized from a truck bearing registration No.TN22 BE7952 which was found parked in import examination shed parking area of Air Cargo Complex, Chennai-27, in terms of Section 111(d) of Customs Act, 1962 read with the provisions of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act 1940 & and Drugs and Cosmetics Rules 1945. However as per Section 125(1) of Customs Act, 1962, I allow the said goods to be redeemed in lieu of confisc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on 128, as it stood immediately before the appointed day, or by the Commissioner (Appeals) under section 128-A, is not legal or proper, direct the proper officer to appeal on its behalf to the Appellate Tribunal against such order: 6. Section 129-A(4) grants an opportunity to a party to file cross-objection as against the order of the Commissioner (appeals) and the Department did not avail this benefit as well. The provision reads as follows:- "(4) On receipt of notice that an appeal has been preferred under this section, the party against whom the appeal has been preferred may, notwithstanding that he may not have appealed against such order or any part thereof, file, within forty-five days of the receipt of the notice, a memor....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... counsel appearing for the appellant would submit that the CESTAT had exceeded its jurisdiction by issuing such a direction, that too in an appeal filed by the assessee. 11. Per contra, Mr.Mohana Murali, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for R2 would draw our attention to the observations at paragraph 27 of the CESTAT's order, wherein the CESTAT makes scathing remarks as against the involvement of the appellant in a smuggling racket and also refers to evidence that has been gathered by the revenue to show that there was fraud committed against the Customs Department. Hence, according to him, there is no infirmity in the CESTAT's order. 12. We have heard both learned counsel. 13. The contents of paragraph 27 which offend the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... is as to whether the tribunal was right in setting aside a direction that had attained finality even at the stage of the order-in-original. 15. Section 129-A provides for appeals to the Appellate Tribunal and the appellant/assessee in this case has raised grounds of appeal in relation to the aspect of confiscation arising from the order-in-original. 16. The Department has neither filed an appeal under Section 129A(2) nor a memorandum of cross objections under Section 129A(4). Hence it has consciously chosen not to challenge the direction relating to redemption on payment of fine. 17. It is true that Section 129-B which deals with 'Orders of Appellate Tribunal' vests in the tribunal, wide powers. The section says that the appellate....