Full Judgment
2. Shri N. Ramanathan, learned Consultant, in reply, pleaded that Bill of Entries were filed on 13th of December, 1985 when Shri Shreyan Vora was the sole proprietor. Thereafter, there had been change of status from time to time. He fairly stated that presently Shri Mitesh Sheth is a partner of Vora Enterprises. He further pleaded that he has got no hesitation in ... a fresh appeal, which will be signed and verified by a proper person. Shri B.K. Singh, learned SDR pleaded that the appeal is not signed in terms of the Customs (Appeals) Rules, 1982 and as such, it is an invalid appeal and should be dismissed.
3. We have heard both the sides and have gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. It is an admitted position that the appeal was presented on 15th February, 1995. Sub-rule 3 of Rule 6 of Customs (Appeals) Rules, 1982 provides that the appeal has to be signed by the person specified in sub-rule (2) of Rule 3 of Customs (Appeals) Rules, 1982. For proper appreciation of the legal position, relevant rules of the Customs (Appeals) Rules, 1982 are reproduced below : - "3. Form of appeal to Collector (Appeals). - (1) An appeal under Sub-section (1) of Section 128 to the Collector (Appeals) shall be made in Form No. C.A. -1.
(2) the grounds of appeal and the form of verification as contained in Form No. C.A.-l shall be signed :- (a) in the case of an individual, by the individual himself or where the individual is absent from India, by the individual concerned or by some person duly authorised by him in this behalf and where the individual is a minor or is mentally, incapacitated from attending to his affairs, by his guardian or by any other person competent to act on his behalf.
(b) in the case of a Hindu undivided family, by the Karta and, where the Karta is absent from India or is mentally incapacitated from attending to his affairs, by any other adult member of such family; (c) in the case of a company or local authority, by the principal officer thereof.
(d) in the case of a firm, by any partner thereof, not being a minor; (e) in the case of any other association, by any member of the association or the principal officer thereof; and (f) in the case of any other person by that person or some person competent to Act on his behalf.
(3) The form of appeal in Form No. C.A. -1 shall be filed in duplicate and shall be accompanied by a copy of the decision or order appealed against.
6. Form of Appeals, etc. to the Appellate Tribunal. - (1) An appeal under Sub-section (1) of Section 129A to the Appellate Tribunal shall be made in Form No. C.A.-3 (2) A memorandum of cross-objections to the Appellate Tribunal under Sub-section (4) of Section 129A shall be made in Form No. C.A.-4.
(3) Where an appeal under Sub-section (1) of Section 129A or a memorandum of cross-objections under Sub-section (4) of that section is made by any person other than the Collector of Customs, the grounds of appeal, the grounds of cross-objections and the forms of verification as contained in Form Nos. C.A.-3 and C.A.-4, as the case may be, respectively shall be signed by the person specified in sub-rule (2) of rule 3.
(4) The form of appeal in Form No. C. A.-3 and the form of memorandum of cross-objections in Form No. C.A.-4 shall be filed in quadruplicate and shall be accompanied by an equal number of copies of the order appealed against (one of which at least shall be a certified copy)." 4. A perusal of sub-rule (3) of Rule 6 shows that the appeal has to be filed in Form Nos. C.A. - 3 and C.A. - 4, as the case may be, respectively has to be signed by the person specified in sub-rule (2) of Rule 3. It is an admitted position that the goods were imported by Shri Shreyan Vora. Accordingly the appeal has to be signed by Shri Shreyan Vora in terms of sub-rule 2(a) of Rule 3 of Customs (Appeals) Rules, 1982. In the matter before us, the appeal has been signed by Shri Mitesh Sheth. He has got no locus standi to file and sign the appeal memo and as such, we hold that the appeal is invalid. The same is dismissed. During the course of arguments, Shri N. Ramanathan, learned consutant had stated that he proposes to file a fresh appeal by the correct signatory. It is open to the appellants to file a fresh appeal in accordance with law, if they so choose. In the result, the appeal is dismissed being invalid and not maintainable in law.