TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (6) TMI 1243
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o, Member (Technical) For the Appellant : None (Shri Keshav Krishnan, Advocate appeared proxy and sought adjournment) For the Revenue : Shri R P Sharma, Special Counsel ORDER P V SUBBA RAO: These six appeals have been filed by the appellants to assail the order dated 31.12.2010 [Impugned order] passed by the Commissioner of Customs, Jaipur insofar as it pertains to each of the appellants. The Commissioner had, in the impugned order, decided the proposals made in the show cause notice dated 19.6.2007 [SCN] and the corrigendum dated 13.7.2007 [Corrigendum] issued by the Additional Director General [ADG] Directorate of Revenue Intelligence [DRI] Delhi Zonal Unit [DZU] Delhi. In the impugned order, the Commissioner rejected the d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....es leave to refer to and rely upon as if the same were specifically set out herein and form a part of this appeal....." 3. All these six appeals as well as the appeal filed by Rajasthan Watch along with some other appeals were disposed of by Final Order No 5472454769/2017 dated 27.6.2017 remanding all appeals to the Commissioner with a direction to decide the matter after the decision of the Supreme Court in the appeal against the judgment of Delhi High Court in Mangli Impex versus UOI [2016 (335) ELT 605 (Del.)] in which it was held that the officers of DRI were not competent to issue SCNs demanding duty. This order of the Delhi High Court was stayed by the Supreme Court [2016(339) ELT A 49]. 4. Revenue assailed the Final Order of th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....idered the provisions of Section 33 of the Income-tax Act, 1922 and Rule 24 of the Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1946 which gave power to the Tribunal to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. For ready reference, Section 33(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1922 and Rule 24 of the Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1946 are reproduced below :- Section 33(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1922 "33(4). The Appellate Tribunal may, after giving both parties to the appeal an opportunity of being heard, pass such orders thereon as it thinks fit, and shall communicate any such orders to the assessee and to the Commissioner." Rule 24 of the Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1946 "24. Where on the day fixed for hearing or any other day to which....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as otherwise been properly filed, for default without making any order thereon in accordance with Section 33(4). The position becomes quite simple when it is remembered that the assessee or the CIT, if aggrieved by the orders of the Appellate Tribunal, can have resort only to the provisions of Section 66. So far as the questions of fact are concerned the decision of the Tribunal is final and reference can be sought to the High Court only on questions of law. The High Court exercises purely advisory jurisdiction and has no appellate or revisional powers. The advisory jurisdiction can be exercised on a proper reference being made and that cannot be done unless the Tribunal itself has passed proper order under Section 33(4). It follows from al....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e aforesaid case to the facts of the present case, as the two provisions are similar, we are of the considered opinion that the Tribunal could not have dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant for want of prosecution and it ought to have decided the appeal on merits even if the appellant or its counsel was not present when the appeal was taken up for hearing. The High Court also erred in law in upholding the order of the Tribunal. 14. We, therefore, set aside the order, dated 18-1-2014 passed by the High Court of Judicature of Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad and also the order, dated 22-8-2012 passed by the Tribunal and direct the Tribunal to decide the appeal on merits. 15. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed with a cost of....