T.K.JAYARAMAN,MEMBER (T) - (1.)THE Revenue has filed ROM in respect of the Final Order No. 1155 to 1160/03, dated 29 -8 -2003 [2003 (158) E.L.T. 205 (Tri.)] passed by this Tribunal. In the above mentioned order, the Tribunal has held that the Commissioner of Customs, Bangalore has no jurisdiction to decide the issue following the ratio of the decision of Apex Court in the case of UOI v Ram Narain Biswanath [1997 (96) E.L.T. 224]. The Tribunal held the Order confiscating the 25 bales under seizure is required to be set aside and matter remanded back for adjudication by the competent authority after due investigation of the actual facts. The revenue has filed this ROM with a prayer to the Tribunal to clearly specify the proper officer who has got the jurisdiction to decide the case.
(2.)WE have considered the issue. ROM petition is only filed for rectification of mistakes apparent on the record. If the Revenue is aggrieved with the Order of the Tribunal, they have to go in appeal. It is not for the Tribunal to indicate the competent or appropriate authority by whom the de novo proceedings are to be initiated. It is for the Revenue to ascertain the competent authority to take necessary action. As such, we do not find any mistake apparent on the record warranting rectification. Hence the ROM application is rejected.