2019 (11) TMI 1751 - AT - Customs

Levy of ADD - Classification of goods - Embroidery machine needle - applicability of Circular No. 24/2011 dt. 31.05.2011 - Confiscation - redemption fine - penalty - HELD THAT - The amount of duty involved in the case is Rs.1,38,91,406/-. Therefore, it is found that original authority has exceeded the breach as contained in the circular cited above and has decided the issue which is beyond his jurisdiction in terms of monetary limits prescribed by the Board s Circular No.24/2011-Cus. dated 31.05.2011. Under the circumstances, it is found that an order passed beyond the jurisdiction is not sustainable and is required to be set aside. To this extent, the impugned order also is liable to be set aside as the same did not consider the basic limits for adjudication proceedings prescribed by the Board and powers conferred under Section 12 of the Customs Act, 1962. The issue requires to go back to the competent authority for re-adjudication after following the principles of natural justice. Ld. Counsel for the appellants, while expressing no objection for remanding the case back to the competent authority, requests that as life consignments are pending, a time frame for adjudication of the case may be put in place - matter remanded to the competent authority who shall re-adjudicate the case within 12 weeks of receipt of this order. Appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
1. Jurisdictional limits of the original authority under Customs Act, 1962 and Board's Circular No.24/2011-Cus.
2. Classification and applicability of Anti Dumping Duty on imported goods.
3. Appeal against orders passed by the Commissioner (Appeals).

Analysis:

Issue 1: Jurisdictional limits of the original authority under Customs Act, 1962 and Board's Circular No.24/2011-Cus.
The case involved the import of goods declared under a Bill of Entry, where discrepancies were found during examination. The original authority re-determined the value of the goods, demanded differential duty, and proposed confiscation under Sections 111 (l) and (m) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Commissioner (Appeals) remanded the matter for further determination, while the department contended that the case should be adjudicated by the Commissioner of Customs based on Board's Circular No.24/2011. The Tribunal observed that the original authority exceeded jurisdiction by deciding beyond the monetary limits prescribed by the Board's Circular, rendering the order unsustainable. The Tribunal set aside the order and remanded the case for re-adjudication within a specified timeframe, emphasizing adherence to principles of natural justice.

Issue 2: Classification and applicability of Anti Dumping Duty on imported goods
The Tribunal noted that the issue of classification of "Embroidery machine needle" and the applicability of Anti Dumping Duty remained unresolved due to the remand by the Commissioner (Appeals). The case required re-adjudication by the competent authority within the specified timeframe, allowing the appellants an opportunity to be heard. The Tribunal stressed the importance of following the prescribed limits for adjudication proceedings and the powers conferred under Section 12 of the Customs Act, 1962.

Issue 3: Appeal against orders passed by the Commissioner (Appeals)
The Tribunal set aside the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) and remanded the matter for re-adjudication within 12 weeks, ensuring compliance with jurisdictional limits and principles of natural justice. The appellants were granted a hearing during the re-adjudication process, emphasizing the need for a fair and timely resolution of the case involving imported goods and duty liabilities.

In conclusion, the Tribunal's judgment focused on upholding jurisdictional limits, ensuring proper adjudication procedures, and providing a fair opportunity for all parties involved in the importation and duty determination process.