HINDUJA FOUNDRIES Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUS. (IMPORTS), CHENNAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD both sides. The impugned order purported to be an adjudication order passed by the Commissioner of Customs is not an order in relation to any goods under import or assessment. Section 122 of the Customs Act, 1962, deals with adjudication of confiscation of goods and penalty for offences. The expression "adjudicating authority" is defined under Section 2(1) of the Act. Under Section 129A of the Act, the Tribunal can hear an appeal against an order passed by a Commissioner as adjudicating authority. The impugned order passed by the Commissioner is like an Advance Ruling in the absence of any goods or offence to adjudicate. The Commissioner can certainly issue a clarification but he has no authority to issue an Advance Ruling and direct an appeal to be filed to the Tribunal against such purported ruling. The Customs Act, 1962, separately provides for an authority for Advance Ruling and the Commissioner is not one such authority. As such, the impugned order is set aside. As and when imports are made by the appellants and requests, if any, are made by them for mutilation of the imported goods, the same may be dealt with by the appropriate adjudicating authority in accordance with law. Thereafter, if the appellants are aggrieved, they may follow the usual appeal procedure by filing appeals to either the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) or to the Tribunal as prescribed. The present appeal is disposed of with the above direction.