Page 167 - ELT_15th May 2020_VOL 372_Part 4th

2020 ] COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, GOA v. SHREE BALAJI AUTOMOBILES 557

cause notice dated 27th March, 2007. Thus, everything was to their knowledge.
There was no suppression of any fact. That question and any other factual issue
with regard to the suppression of facts ought to have been gone into in detail by
the Learned Tribunal.
20. When the impugned order of the Tribunal is challenged on the
above ground that it was passed in breach of the principles of natural justice and
in ignorance of the law of limitation, then, in our opinion, it cannot be said that
the appeal has a relation to classification of goods, its valuation or the rate of du-
ty. It is neither directly nor indirectly related to these questions.
21. Therefore, on the above two grounds, we set aside the impugned
order of the Tribunal dated 29th June, 2018.
22. Since, mixed questions of facts and law are involved, it would be
proper to remand the entire matter to the Tribunal for reconsideration and re-
determination.
23. We direct the Tribunal to re-hear the appeal and pass a reasoned
order within six months of communication of this order preferably.
24. The Appeal (CEXA 16 of 2019) is allowed to the above extent.
_______

2020 (372) E.L.T. 557 (Bom.)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY AT GOA

M.S. Sonak and M.S. Jawalkar, JJ.
COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, GOA
Versus
SHREE BALAJI AUTOMOBILES

Custom Appeal Nos. 5 of 2010 & 5 of 2014, decided on 28-1-2020
Appellate Tribunal - No power of Review - Re-deciding already decid-
ed issue - Power to Review - After having already decided Appeal No.
C/841/1997 vide its order dated 10-7-1998, re-deciding same appeal in different
manner after 9 years vide its order dated 19-4-2007 by Tribunal not sustainable
- Apparently fact of case having already been disposed of was never brought
to knowledge of Tribunal either by registry or by SDR at time of re-deciding
the case - Issuance of second order would tantamount to review of its own ear-
lier order for which reportedly no power is available with Tribunal - In view
of above, later order dated 19-4-2007 is set aside and original order dated 10-7-
1998 is retained - However, party effected by earlier order has a right to take
appropriate proceedings against said order - Section 129B of Customs Act,
1962. [paras 8, 9, 10, 11]
Appeal allowed
CASE CITED
C.P. Aquaculture (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. President, CESTAT — 2010 (260) E.L.T. 501 (Mad.)
— Referred ....................................................................................................................................... [Para 10]
REPRESENTED BY : Ms. Asha Desai, Senior CGSC, for the Appellant.
EXCISE LAW TIMES  15th May 2020  167