On 12 October 2018, the High Court at Bombay dismissed three Notices of Motion and accompanying appeals filed by the Commissioner of CGST as withdrawn by the learned counsel for the appellants.
Notices of Motion (Nos. 520, 522, 524 of 2018) and appeals are dismissed as withdrawn.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
7-9-NMA-520&522&524-18.doc
Sharayu Khot .
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 520 OF 2018
IN
CUSTOM APPEAL (L) NO. 29 OF 2018 WITH
CUSTOM APPEAL (L) NO. 29 OF 2018
The Commissioner of CGST and Central …Applicant/ Excise Belapur Commissionerate Appellant
Versus
Bhaskar B. Shah …Respondent
ALONGWITH
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 522 OF 2018
IN
CUSTOM APPEAL (L) NO. 30 OF 2018 WITH CUSTOM APPEAL (L) NO. 30 OF 2018
The Commissioner of CGST and Central …Applicant/ Excise Belapur Commissionerate Appellant
Versus
Gandhi Associates …Respondent
ALONG WITH
1 / 4 October 12, 2018
7-9-NMA-520&522&524-18.doc
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 524 OF 2018
IN
CUSTOM APPEAL (L) NO. 28 OF 2018 WITH
CUSTOM APPEAL (L) NO. 28 OF 2018
The Commissioner of CGST and Central …Applicant/ Excise Belapur Commissionerate Appellant
Versus
Jabs International Pvt. Ltd. …Respondent
Mr. Swapnil Bangur, for the Applicant/Appellant (in all NMAs). Mr. Anil Balani a/w Mr. Stebin Mathew, for the Respondents (in all NMAs).
CORAM : M.S. SANKLECHA & RIYAZ I. CHAGLA, JJ.
DATE : 12 October 2018
ORDER :
following common order:-
“ 1. These three Notices of Motion have been taken out for condonation of delay in filing the three
2 / 4
October 12, 2018
7-9-NMA-520&522&524-18.doc
Appeals from the Order dated 20th February, 2017 passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal Tribunal). The Applicant / Appellant before us is the Commissioner, CGST and Central Excise.
2. Mr. Balani, the learned counsel appearing for the Respondents invites out attention to the fact that impugned order of the Tribunal dated 20th February, 2017 which is sought to be appealed against is from an order passed in an appeal by the Tribunal under Customs Act, 1962 with regard to the payment of customs duty on import of goods. In the above view, it is submitted that the Appeal is filed by an Authority who does not exercise jurisdiction under the Customs Act, 1962.
3. Prima facie this seems to be so. No mention is made in Affidavit in Support of the Notices of Motion or even in the Appeal memo, the basis of the Applicant being aggrieved with an order under the Customs Act, 1962.
4. In that view of the matter, Mr. Joshi seeks time to take instructions and file an Affidavit explaining basis of the Commissioner exercising jurisdiction in the present case.
3 / 4 October 12, 2018
7-9-NMA-520&522&524-18.doc
5. At the request of Mr. Joshi, above Notices of Motion are adjourned to 12th October, 2018. ”
in support of these Appeals seeks to withdraw these Motions as well as these Appeals filed from the order of the Tribunal dated 20th February 2017, as the Appellant does not exercise jurisdiction under the Customs Act, 1962.
Appeals are dismissed as withdrawn.
[RIYAZ I. CHAGLA J.] [M.S. SANKLECHA, J.]
4 / 4
October 12, 2018
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Notices of Motion seeking condonation of delay in filing appeals under the Customs Act, 1962 could be maintained given the appellant's standing.
Whether the Appellant has prima facie jurisdiction to file appeals under the Customs Act, 1962.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
The Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise
Bhaskar B. Shah
Gandhi Associates
Jabs International Pvt. Ltd.
M.S. SANKLECHA
RIYAZ I. CHAGLA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
