Case Law Details
Commissioner of Customs ACC Export Vs Arihant Overseas (Delhi High Court)
Introduction: In a recent ruling by the Delhi High Court, the jurisdiction of the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) was challenged in the case of Commissioner of Customs ACC Export vs. Arihant Overseas. The High Court sets aside the CESTAT order and directs the appellant to file a revision with the Central Government under the Customs Act.
Analysis: The appeal was filed against a CESTAT order confirming a demand of drawback and order of confiscation of goods already exported under drawback against the respondent. The crux of the challenge revolved around the jurisdiction of the Tribunal to entertain the appeal. The appellant cited a precedent where the court held that an order passed by a court lacking subject matter jurisdiction is null and void.
In accordance with Section 129 (DD) of the Customs Act, the remedy for challenging the order was through revision with the Central Government, not through an appeal to the Tribunal. While the respondent conceded to this point, they argued that the objection was not raised at an appropriate stage, thus hindering their ability to approach the Revisional Authority within the statutory time limit. The High Court granted the respondent two months to file a revision against the Order-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeal).
Conclusion: The Delhi High Court’s decision underscores the importance of jurisdictional clarity in legal proceedings. By setting aside the CESTAT order and directing a revision with the Central Government, the court ensures adherence to statutory provisions. This ruling reaffirms the principle that jurisdiction cannot be conferred upon a court by consent, waiver, or acquiescence when barred by statute, thereby upholding the integrity of the legal process.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
