2017 (1) TMI 527 - AT - Customs

Benefit of N/N. 12/2012-CE - denial on the ground that the assessee has taken the credit - Subsequently, in SRF Limited vs. CC, Chennai 2015 (4) TMI 561 - SUPREME COURT , the Apex Court has interpreted the Condition No. 20 of Notification No. 06/2002-CE dated 01.03.2002 (Sl. No. 122) which was identical to Condition No. 16 of Notification No. 12/2012-CE. It was held by the Hon ble Apex Court that no question of availing CENVAT credit under the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2002 arises where inputs are procured from a country other than India Held that - it appears that when the order in appeal was passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), the above mentioned judgments/ orders were not available. In other words, the orders passed by Hon ble Supreme Court as well as passed by Tribunal are subsequent to the impugned order. When it is so then we deem it fit to remand the matter to the original adjudicating authority to examine the claim of the assessee in the light of judgements (supra), for denovo assessment, but within a period of four months - appeal allowed by way of remand.

Issues:
1. Classification of imported mobile phones under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975.
2. Applicability of concessional rate of CVD under Notification No. 12/2012-CE.
3. Interpretation of conditions for availing benefits under the Notification.
4. Admissibility of CENVAT credit under the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004.
5. Impact of judicial precedents on the case.
6. Remand of the matter for denovo assessment by the original adjudicating authority.

Analysis:
1. The issue in this case revolves around the classification of imported mobile phones under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The appellant imported mobile phones and classified them under Tariff item 85171290, paying additional customs duty at the prescribed rate. The dispute arose as to whether the appellant satisfied the conditions for availing benefits under Notification No. 12/2012-CE, specifically related to the concessional rate of CVD.

2. The Tribunal referred to a similar case involving M/s L.G. Electronics India Pvt. Ltd., where the Department's consistent stand was that the condition for availing the concessional rate of CVD could not be met by imported goods. The appellant in the present case sought to claim the benefit based on a judgment by the Hon'ble Apex Court in SRF Limited vs. CC, Chennai. The Tribunal considered the interpretation of conditions under the Notification in light of this precedent.

3. The appellant relied on the decision in the case of M/s Sony India Pvt. Ltd. vs. CC (Import & General), New Delhi, and the judgment in SRF Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Customs, Chennai, where the Hon'ble Supreme Court allowed the appellant's claim. The Tribunal noted that these judgments were subsequent to the impugned order by the Commissioner (Appeals), leading to a decision to remand the matter to the original adjudicating authority for denovo assessment within a specified timeframe.

4. The Tribunal emphasized the need for the adjudicating authority to reexamine the appellant's claim in light of the subsequent judgments and provide a reasonable opportunity for hearing. The remand was aimed at ensuring a fair assessment of the case based on the updated legal position resulting from the judicial precedents cited by the appellant. The decision to allow the appeals by way of remand indicated a procedural step to address the evolving legal landscape affecting the case.

5. The judgment, pronounced on 05.01.2017, highlighted the significance of judicial precedents in influencing the interpretation and application of legal provisions related to customs duties and benefits under specific notifications. The remand order reflected the Tribunal's commitment to ensuring a thorough review of the case in line with the evolving legal principles established by higher courts, thereby upholding the principles of natural justice and fair adjudication in customs matters.

← Previous Next →