TITAN COMPANY LTD. Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal has been filed by the appellant against the letter dated 5 -12 -2013 of the Assistant Commissioner of Customs (SIIB -IPR cell), Kochi, intimating the appellant to participate in the MSTC E -auction of the watches of 'Titan' brand, upon compliance of the prescribed procedure. Further, the appellant was also informed that the said letter dated 5 -12 -2013 is issued with the approval of the Commissioner of Customs. The appellant has entertained the belief that since the above letter has been issued with the approval of the Commissioner of Customs, the same should be considered as an appealable order in terms of Section 129 of the Customs Act, 1962, and accordingly, the appeal has been preferred in this Tribunal. The question involved in this appeal for consideration is as to whether the above referred letter of Asst. Commissioner can be considered as an order, against which appeal can be preferred before the Tribunal? Learned Advocate appearing for the appellant submitted that since the decision has been taken by the Commissioner of Customs for E -auction of the watches; and such decision having been conveyed by the Asst. Commissioner of Customs vide letter dated 5 -12 -2013, the said letter should be considered as an 'order' for filing appeal before this Tribunal. In support of his said submission, the learned Advocate had cited the following decisions rendered by the judicial forums:

(2.) LEARNED AR appearing for the respondent has taken a strong objection to the maintainability of the appeal, on the ground that a decision or order passed by the Commissioner of Customs as an adjudicating authority can only be considered for filing appeal before the Tribunal and not otherwise.

(3.) THE issue involved in the above referred decisions relied upon and cited by the learned Advocate for the appellant, are not at all relevant in the context of the present dispute, which are discussed herein below: