DEBANGSU BASAK,J. - (1.) The Court : The petitioner seeks provisional release of the goods pending adjudication of an appeal directed against the order in original dated November 29, 2017.
(2.) Learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that, the appellate authority has no power to grant interim order. He submits that, the rules of business of the appellate authority does not permit the petitioner to make any application for provisional release. He relies on 2010 (258) ELT 145 (Tribunal - Chennai) Unitech Enterprises v. Commissioner of Customs, Chennai in support of his contention that, the tribunal has no jurisdiction to grant interim order of release of the goods. He contents that, his client are ready and willing to comply with any direction that may be imposed or passed by the Court towards provisional release of the goods.
(3.) Learned Advocate appearing for the department submits that, the Tribunal is vested with necessary jurisdiction to pass interim orders including passing an order for release in a given case. He relies upon the provisions of Rules 4, 28C and 41 of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1982 in support of his contentions.;