AASU TEXTILES PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (PREVENTIVE), MUMBAI, HAVING HIS OFFICE AT NEW CUSTOM HOUSE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this Appeal, the assessee challenges the order of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai (CESTAT) dated 8th March, 2016. This Appeal was partly argued before another Bench and leave was sought to amend the memo to introduce additional grounds. The additional grounds, according to the counsel appearing for the assessee, would raise substantial questions of law. The four questions introduced by amendment read as under:

(2.) Initially, the assessee proposed a question as substantial question of law but on merits. Now, what is introduced is a question of jurisdiction.

(3.) Mr. Jain appearing in support of this Appeal would submit that the argument was of jurisdiction. It is clear, according to him, from the annexures to the paper book that show cause notice was not issued by the competent authority/appropriate officer under the Customs Act, 1962. The show cause notice was issued by an officer exercising powers under the Central Excise Act, 1944. In that, our attention is invited to page 82 Exh."H" of the paper book which says that though this is a show cause notice referable to Section 124 of the Customs Act, 1962, it is issued by the office of the Commissioner of Central Excise, and to be precise, by the Deputy Commissioner (Preventive), Central Excise, ThaneI.