At, Customs Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal West Zonal Bench At Mumbai
By, THE HONORABLE JUSTICE: RAMESH NAIR
For Petitioner: Pooja C. Reddy, Advocate and Ashok Kesariya And For Respondents: K.M. D'Souza, Assistant Commissioner (AR)
1. The applicant filed this application as intervener. Ms. Pooja C. Reddy, ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that since the impugned Order-in-Appeal No. C/85766/2017 is in their favour therefore they are the concerned party in the case. The proceedings of this appeal will prejudice the applicant. Therefore they may be allowed to be impleaded as a party in the Customs appeal filed by M/s. K. Trumbaklal.
2. Shri K.M. D'Souza, ld. Assistant Commissioner (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue submits that the application filed by the applicant is not supported by any authority of law as there is no provision in the Customs Act, that any person other than the appellant/respondent can be impleaded in any appeal. In the present case the applicant has not filed any appeal, therefore they cannot be permitted to be impleaded in the appeal as intervener. I have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides. I find that the applicant wish to be impleaded in the Custom Appeal filed by M/s. K. Trumbaklal. It is fact that the applicant has not filed any appeal against the impugned order, the only person can be impeded in the matter of appeal, who is aggrieved with the order impugned. In the present case the applicant has not filed any appeal for the reason that impugned order is in their favour therefore they being not an aggrieved party do not have any locus standi to be impleaded in the Customs appeal filed by some other person. There is no provision in the Customs Act to all
Please Login To View The Full Judgment!
ow any person other than an aggrieved person as intervener in any of appeal. I therefore find that the application is not maintainable; hence the same is dismissed as non-