Commissioner Of Customs v. Satya Overseas

$~5 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CUSAA 136/2018 AND CM APPL. 20019/2018 COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS ..... Appellant Through:

Mr.

Harpreet Singh, Sr.

Standing Counsel.

versus SATYA OVERSEAS ..... Respondent Through:

None.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA

O R D E R

% 12.09.2018 Despite notice, the respondent is unrepresented. Accordingly, the following question of law is framed :

"Whether the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter „CESTAT‟) was justified in remanding the matter for adjudication to the concerned official to first decide the issue of jurisdiction after the appeal pending in the Supreme Court against the reported judgment in the case of Mangli Impex Limited vs. Union of India, 2016 (339) ELT 605 (Del.) is decided?"

At the outset, this Court notices that in the identical circumstances, where a similar issue was sought to be urged, this Court had passed an order in a batch of appeals [Commissioner of Customs (General) vs. SAP India Pvt. Ltd., CUSAA 40/2018 and other connected matters decided on 02.04.2018].

The Court had then directed as follows:

"Accordingly, the impugned order challenged in these appeals, remanding the matter to the adjudicating authority

to await the judgment of the Supreme Court in the appeal preferred against the decision in Mangli Impex Limited vs. Union of India 2016 (335) ELT 605 (Del) is set aside. The appeals preferred before the Tribunal are restored to their original position. The Tribunal would decide the appeals on merits including the question of jurisdiction of the officer of the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence who had issued show cause notices. The said issue would be examined by the Tribunal without being influenced by the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of Mangli Implex Limited (supra). We clarify that we have not expressed any opinion on merits of the appeals or on the procedure that the Tribunal should adopt and follow.

Question of law is accordingly answered. The appeals are disposed of in the aforesaid terms. There would be no order as to costs."

Following the above decision, the impugned order is hereby set aside and the matter is remitted to the CESTAT which shall proceed to examine and decide the merits of the appeals without being influenced by the decision of this Court in Mangli Impex (supra). The Court, at the same time, like in the other cases, expresses no opinion on the merits or procedure that the Tribunal should adopt and follow. The matter shall be listed before the CESTAT on 8th October, 2018, which shall issue notice to the parties and conduct further proceedings. The appeal is allowed partly in the above terms. The pending application also stand disposed of.

S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J A. K. CHAWLA, J SEPTEMBER 12, 2018/rc