By TIOL News Service

CHENNAI, 27 OCT, 2015: SCN was issued by Commissioner Kolkata and Order was passed by Commissioner, LTU, Chennai. Appellant, Areva T&D India Ltd, filed appeal before CESTAT, Chennai Bench. Upon demerger, the appellant unit came under Schneider Electric Infrastructure Ltd. Revenue then filed application seeking for change of cause title and application for transfer of appeal to CESTAT Kolkata.

Appellant objected to transfer of appeal to CESTAT Kolkata on the basis that Appeal has to be heard by Chennai Bench as per CESTAT (Procedure) Rules as the jurisdictional Bench is Chennai where the Commissioner, LTU passed the impugned order. Appellant further submitted that only assessee-appellant has right to seek for transfer of appeal from one Bench to another and Respondent-revenue cannot seek transfer of appeal. Also, if the appeal is transferred to Kolkata Bench, in the event of any further appeal, it has to be filed only before the jurisdictional Madras High Court as Kolkata High Court has no jurisdiction.

Department submitted that the cause of action arose at Kolkata since SCN was issued by Commissioner of Central Excise, Kolkata and so appeal should be transferred to CESTAT Kolkata.

Tribunal noted that impugned Order was passed by the Commissioner, LTU, Chennai and referred to High Court decisions wherein it was held that appeal lies with the Tribunal Bench where the cause of action arose. In the present case, Order has been passed by Commissioner, LTU, Chennai, falling within the jurisdiction of Chennai Bench falling within the jurisdiction of the High Court of Madras. Therefore, the respective appeal would lie in Chennai Bench. Accordingly, the Tribunal rejected the request of Revenue for transfer of appeal to CESTAT Bench, Kolkata.

(See 2015-TIOL-2299-CESTAT-MAD)