2006 (8) TMI 471 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Stay application based on conflicting judgments from Kerala High Court and Andhra Pradesh High Court regarding the import of Second Hand Photocopier Machines.

Analysis:
1. The Tribunal considered a stay application and appeal together, as the issue was addressed in the Larger Bench judgment of M/s. Atul Commodities case. The Commissioner (Appeals) granted clearance of Second Hand Photocopier Machines based on this judgment, stating they are freely importable. The Revenue contended that an appeal was filed before the Supreme Court and referred to a Kerala High Court judgment in their favor. However, the appellants relied on the judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in a similar case. The learned J.D.R argued for the stay application based on the Kerala High Court judgment, while the Counsel opposed, citing the Andhra Pradesh High Court judgment applicable to the assessee.

2. The learned J.D.R emphasized the pending Supreme Court matter and favored granting the stay application. In contrast, the Counsel argued that the Andhra Pradesh High Court judgment should apply to the assessee, and mere pendency of the appeal before the Supreme Court should not be a reason to stay the impugned order. The Tribunal carefully considered the conflicting judgments and concluded that the issue of importing Second Hand Photocopier Machines was decided in favor of the assessee by the Larger Bench judgment. Despite the disagreement between the Kerala High Court and Andhra Pradesh High Court rulings, the Tribunal held that the Andhra Pradesh High Court judgment should apply to the assessee's case. Consequently, the Tribunal found no merit in the stay application and appeal, leading to their rejection.

3. In the final decision, the Tribunal rejected the stay application and appeal, as pronounced and dictated in open court. The judgment highlighted the importance of the Larger Bench judgment in resolving the issue of importing Second Hand Photocopier Machines and the relevance of jurisdiction-specific High Court rulings in determining the applicable legal precedent for the case at hand.