Tirupati Embroideries Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Tuticorin - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1150338
CourtCustoms Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided OnJan-08-2014
Case NumberAppeal No.C/S/54 of 2011 & C/68 of 2011 [Arising Out of Order-in-Original (De Novo-I) No.36 of 2010 dt. 9.12.2010 passed by the Commissioner of Customs, Tuticorin]
JudgeTHE HONOURABLE MR. P.K. DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER & THE HONOURABLE MR. MATHEW JOHN, TECHNICAL MEMBER
AppellantTirupati Embroideries
RespondentCommissioner of Customs, Tuticorin
Excerpt:
p.k. das, j. 1. ld. ar on behalf of revenue raised preliminary objection in this appeal. he submits that the appeal was filed by shri t.pandi claiming to be the partner of the applicant-firm.  he submits that it is revealed from the adjudication order at para 06.04 that t.pandi is not the partner of the applicant-firm. he submits that by letter dt. 24.6.2013, the asst. commissioner (review) office of the commissioner of customs, tuticorin confirms this fact.  on behalf of the applicant, the learned advocate submits that the company is defunct now and therefore they are unable to contact the applicant-company.2. after considering the submissions of both sides, and on perusal of the letter dt. 24.6.2013 and the finding of the adjudication order, we agree with the submission of ld. ar for revenue. it is seen that shri t. pandi is not competent to file this appeal.  accordingly, the stay application and appeal are dismissed as not maintainable.
Judgment:

P.K. Das, J.

1. Ld. AR on behalf of Revenue raised preliminary objection in this appeal. He submits that the appeal was filed by Shri T.Pandi claiming to be the partner of the applicant-firm.  He submits that it is revealed from the adjudication order at para 06.04 that T.Pandi is not the partner of the applicant-firm. He submits that by letter dt. 24.6.2013, the Asst. Commissioner (Review) office of the Commissioner of Customs, Tuticorin confirms this fact.  On behalf of the applicant, the learned advocate submits that the company is defunct now and therefore they are unable to contact the applicant-company.2. After considering the submissions of both sides, and on perusal of the letter dt. 24.6.2013 and the finding of the adjudication order, we agree with the submission of Ld. AR for Revenue. It is seen that Shri T. Pandi is not competent to file this appeal.  Accordingly, the stay application and appeal are dismissed as not maintainable.