TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (4) TMI 1605
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (i) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble CESTAT is right in holding that the Order-in-Original passed by Commissioner (in-situ) was passed in the capacity of Commissioner, when another officer was already working as Commissioner and head of Customs Commissionerate, Kandla on the date of passing of Order-in-Original by the Commissioner (in-situ) who was adjudicating the case in the capacity of the Additional Commissioner. (ii) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble CESTAT is right in relying on the Re-test Report of Central Revenue Control Laboratory, New Delhi in case of goods imported by other vessel MT Hanyu Camellia, which is based on Standard EN 15940 : 2019, a European Stand....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....by decision dated 04.01.2024 allowed the appeals. It is submitted that against the very same order passed by Shri Ram Het Meena, the Customs Authority filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) Kandla, which was subsequently rejected by the order dated 24.02.2025 i.e. on the basis of the decision of the CESTAT. 3.2. Learned Senior Standing Counsel Mr. C.B. Gupta has further submitted that when the order dated 25.07.2023 was passed by Shri Ram Het Meena, there was another Commissioner who was already holding his post and hence, he could not have passed the order. It is, therefore, submitted that thereafter the Customs Authority filed Rectification of Mistake Application No.10308 of 2024, which was also rejected by the or....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....equired to be treated as in such authority and hence appropriate remedy which was available with the respondent was to challenge before the CESTAT. 5. We have heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties at length. The Tax Appeal is admitted for consideration of the following substantial questions of law : "10(i) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble CESTAT is right in holding that the Order-in-Original passed by Commissioner (in-situ) was passed in the capacity of Commissioner, when another officer was already working as Commissioner and head of Customs Commissionerate, Kandla on the date of passing of Order-in-Original by the Commissioner (in-situ) who was adjudicating the case in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssioner of Customs. Accordingly, in such capacity, he passed the Order-in-Original. 8. At this stage, we may mention and it is not denied by the respondent that under the provision of Section 129A of the Act, more particularly, the provision of Section 129A(1)(a) of the Act, a person who is aggrieved by an order or decision passed by the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner of Customs as an adjudicating authority has to file an appeal before the CESTAT. Thus, the order passed by Shri Ram Het Meena as a Commissioner of Customs, can only be challenged before the CESTAT under the provisions of Section 129A of the Act which the respondent did and accordingly, the CESTAT entertained the appeal. 9. At this juncture, we have noticed that t....