2007 (2) TMI 44 - AT - Customs

Assessment of B.E. by an officer below the rank of AC/DC is not an appealable order for claim of benefit of exemption notification not exercised at the time of clearance of machinery under EPCG scheme - Matter remanded for re-consideration on merit.

Summary

Issues:
1. Interpretation of Customs Notifications regarding duty rates and exemptions.
2. Reassessment of Bill of Entry under EPCG scheme.
3. Appeal against the decision of Commissioner (Appeals) regarding reassessment.

Detailed Analysis:

1. The case involved the interpretation of Customs Notifications related to duty rates and exemptions. The appellants imported "Computer controlled HTHP Yarn Dyeing Machine" under the EPCG scheme. They executed a bond for over Rs. 1.00 crore, and the Bills of Entry were assessed for Basic Customs Duty (BCD) at 5% and noted a 'duty saved' amount for Countervailing Duty (CVD). Subsequently, the appellants claimed that they were not liable to pay CVD based on a specific Customs Notification. The assessing authority did not agree, leading to an appeal to the Commissioner (Appeals) and further to the present appeal.

2. The issue of reassessment of the Bill of Entry under the EPCG scheme was a crucial point in the case. The appellants requested reassessment to 'nil' CVD based on a Customs Notification exempting their imported machines from CVD. The Commissioner (Appeals) held that reassessment was not permissible as the goods had already been cleared for home consumption. The Tribunal considered previous decisions and found that the assessment by an officer subordinate to the Assistant Commissioner was not appealable, and thus, the appellants' claim for reassessment should be considered on merits by the Assistant/Deputy Commissioner of Customs.

3. The appeal was against the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) regarding the reassessment of the Bill of Entry. The Tribunal set aside the lower authorities' proceedings and directed the assessing authority (AC/DC) to reconsider the appellants' claim for reassessment. The Tribunal emphasized that the Assistant Commissioner was not involved in the assessment, and the appellants' claim should be reviewed by the appropriate Customs authority to address their export obligation concerns in a revenue-neutral manner. The appeal was allowed by way of remand.

In conclusion, the judgment focused on the correct interpretation of Customs Notifications, the possibility of reassessment under the EPCG scheme, and the procedural aspects of appealing against assessment decisions. The Tribunal emphasized the need for a thorough review of the appellants' claim by the appropriate Customs authority to ensure justice and address the duty-related obligations effectively.