Full Text
CUSAA 88/2019,91/2019,94/2019,95/2019&98/2019
COMMISSIONER OFCUSTOMS Appellant
Through Ms.K.Enatoli Sema,Advocate,
Through Mr. Akshil Krishan Maggu and Mr. Shailendra KumarPandey,Advocates.
HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE ASHA MENON
27.08.2019 C.M.No.8035/2019(exemptionl in CUSAA 88/2019
C.M.No.8046/2019(exemptionl in CUSAA 94/2019 C.M.No.8048/2019 rexemption)in CUSAA 95/2019
C.M.No.8054/2019(exemption)in CUSAA 98/2019 Allowed,subjectto alljust exceptions.
CUSAA 88/2019and C.M.No.8034/2019fdelav^ CUSAA 91/2019and C.M.No.8039/2019(delavl
CUSAA 94/2019and C.M.No.8045/2019(delavl CUSAA 95/2019and C.M.No.8047/2019 tdelavl
ORDER
1. With the consent of the parties, the appeals are taken up for final hearing.
2. The present appeals are directed against the orders dated 20.07.2017 passed by the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal(in short 'CESTAT'), disposing of Customs Appeal Nos. C/1010/2005, C/1009/2005, C/1012/2005, C/1011/2005 and C/1013/2005, respectively filed by the respondent, remanding the matter back to the original CUSAA 88/2019 2019:DHC:7702-DB I J adjudicating authority for deciding theissueofjurisdictionafterawaiting the decision ofthe Supreme Court in the appeal preferred by the Union of India againstthejudgment ofthe Coordinate Bench ofthis Court in Mangli Impex vs.Union ofIndia reported as2016(335)ELT605(Del.).
3. For passing the aforesaid order,the CESTAT has followed the order dated 25.05.2017 passed by a Coordinate Bench in W.P.(C) 4438/2017 entitled BSNL vs.UQI&Qrs.
4. By a subsequent order dated 20.11.2017, passed by another Coordinate Bench in Vipul OverseasPvt.Ltd. vs.Commissioner ofCn.tnn.. ^ reported 2018(359)ELT646(Del.)and the orderdated 13.12.2017,passed by yet another Bench in CUSAA 67/2017entitled Forech India Pvt T.tH v. Commissioner of Customs, Inland Container Depot Tuglakabad. New Delhi,in similar circumstances,the appeals were remanded to CESTATfor a fresh decision on merits, uninfluenced by the decision in the case of MangliImpex(supra), which had since beenstayed bythe SupremeCourt vide order dated 07.10.2016. Pertinently, the said appeal is still pending adjudication before the Supreme Court.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent has no objection if an order on ^ similar lines, as was passed in Vipul Overseas /supra), is passed in the present appeals.
6. Accordingly,following the order passed in the case ofVipul Overseas {supra},the impugned orders dated 20.07.2017,passed by the CESTAT are quashed and set aside. Customs Appeal Nos. C/1010/2005, C/1009/2005, C/1012/2005, C/1011/2005 and C/1013/2005 are restored to their original position, for the CESTATto disposethesame afresh,uninfluenced bythe CUSAA 88/2019 d /-j Page2of[3] decision inthe case ofMangliImpex(supra).
7. Beforeproceedingto decidethe captioned appeals,the CESTATshall ensure service ofnotice upon the respondents.
8. The presentappealsare allowed and disposed ofon the aboveterms. HIMA KOHLI,J AUGUST 27,2019 NA ASHA MENON,J CUSAA 88/2019 Page3of[3]