Page 188 - ELT_15th June 2020_VOL 372_Part 6th

866 EXCISE LAW TIMES [ Vol. 372

office of DRI, the show cause notice was served on one Shri Rohit Bhasin, who is
said to be authorised by the appellant Shri Surinder Khanna to receive the show
cause notice, at Karol Bagh. The said report has been forwarded to this Tribunal
by the Principal Commissioner, ICD, Tughlakabad, New Delhi by Letter C. No.
VIII/ICD/TKD/Rev./Imp/Misc.11/2018/Pt., dated 6-6-2019. As per the copy of
receipt issued by Rohit Bhasin dated 25-9-2015, it is stated that he has received
the notice on behalf of the appellant who has authorised him, as he is outside
India. However, no such authorisation has been given nor Revenue has taken
any other steps for service of notice.
5. Considering the facts and circumstances and the requirement of ser-
vice of show cause notice under the provisions of the Act, I hold that there is no
effective service of show cause notice on the appellant. Further, I hold that the
impugned order has been passed without any jurisdiction. For assuming the ju-
risdiction to pass an adjudication order, service of show cause notice is must, as
provided in law. In the present case, there is no proper authorisation neither
Rohit Bhasin is a relative of the appellant, nor there being any proper authorisa-
tion to receive the show cause notice. Accordingly, the impugned order is set
aside so far as this appellant is concerned. The appellant is entitled to consequen-
tial benefit in accordance with law.
(Dictated and pronounced in open Court)
_______

2020 (372) E.L.T. 866 (Tri. - Ahmd.)

IN THE CESTAT, WEST ZONAL BENCH, AHMEDABAD
[COURT NO. III]
Shri Ramesh Nair, Member (J)
DINESH MILLS LTD.
Versus
COMMR. OF CUSTOMS, AHMEDABAD
Final Order No. A/12555/2019-WZB/AHD, dated 23-12-2019 in Appeal No.
C/13045/2018
Refund of additional duty of excise - Application for rectification of
Bill of Entry under Section 149 read with Section 154 of Customs Act, 1962
filed by appellant but same not disposed of which compelled the appellant to
file the refund claim - Application under Section 149 ibid directly related to
the present refund matter - Department must first dispose of the application of
appellant filed under Section 149 ibid read with Section 154 ibid and thereaf-
ter, should reprocess the refund claim. [para 4]
Matter remanded
REPRESENTED BY : Shri M. Pandya, Advocate, for the Appellant.
Shri Sanjiv Kinker, Superintendent (AR), for the
Respondent.
[Order]. - The present appeal was filed against the impugned order by
which the Learned Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the rejection of the refund
EXCISE LAW TIMES  15th June 2020  188