SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2018 Supreme(Mad) 3799

T.S.SIVAGNANAM, V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN
RAJARAM JOHRA – Appellant
Versus
COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
A. Thiyagarajan, Adv., S. Ramesh Kumar, Adv., R. Hemalatha, Adv.

JUDGMENT

T.S. SIVAGNANAM, J.

1. This appeal by the assesee is directed against the final order passed by the Customs, Exercise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, South Zonal Bench, Chennai, (in short, "the Tribunal") dated 29.04.2016 in Final Order No.40678/2016.

2. Mr.A.Thiyagarajan, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant, submitted that the Court may consider the substantial questions of law No.(i) and (iii), though, the appeals have been admitted on 3 substantial questions of law vide order dated 02.12.2016. Thus, recording the concession given by the learned Senior Counsel for the appellant, this appeal is admitted on the following two substantial questions of law :

"(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in suo motu resorting the order of the Additional Commissioner of Customs, Adjudicating Authority, when there was no appeal filed by the Department under Section 129A or cross appeal under Section 129A(4) of Customs Act is correct in law and

(iii) Whether on the facts and in circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the Department has discharged the burden of proof is correct in law ?"

3. The appella












Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top