9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (6) TMI 659 - AT - CustomsClassification of Steam Coal and Bituminous Coal - case of Revenue is that since the Larger Bench has issued specific direction for disposal of the appeals, therefore, the present appeals be decided in the light of the observations recorded by the Larger Bench in the Order dt.16.01.2017 as the said judgment is binding on this Tribunal - Held that - it is clear that the registry was directed to place the appeals before the respective benches for appropriate order and disposal of the appeals in the light of the direction/observation made in the order of the Larger Bench. The direction/observation of the Larger Bench could be located at Para 6 of the order, wherein liberty is granted to all the assesses to come again before this Tribunal after receiving the final verdict from the Apex Court within prescribed time, if advised so - the present appeals are disposed of with liberty to the appellants to approach this Tribunal after final verdict on the issue of classification of Steam Coal and Bituminous Coal from the Hon'ble Apex Court - appeal allowed by way of remand.
Issues Involved:
1. Classification of Steam Coal and Bituminous Coal. 2. Enforcement of demands and refunds during the pendency of the appeals. 3. Ancillary issues raised in the respective appeals. Detailed Analysis: Classification of Steam Coal and Bituminous Coal: The primary issue in these appeals is the classification of imported coal, specifically whether it should be classified as Steam Coal or Bituminous Coal. The classification determines the applicable duty rate. Steam Coal, classified under chapter sub-heading 27011920, attracted a 'NIL' rate of duty during the relevant period, whereas Bituminous Coal, classified under chapter sub-heading 27011200, attracted a 5% duty as per Notification No.12/2012-Cus, dt.17.03.2012. Different benches of the Tribunal had conflicting opinions on this matter. The Chennai and Ahmedabad Benches initially considered the coal as Steam Coal, attracting no duty, a view followed by the Mumbai Bench. Conversely, the Bangalore Bench classified it as Bituminous Coal, attracting a 5% duty. Given these conflicting views, the issue was referred to a Larger Bench for resolution. The Larger Bench, after hearing all concerned parties, noted that the matter was pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Consequently, the Larger Bench relegated these appeals to the respective benches to dispose of them in light of its observations, granting liberty to the appellants to approach the Tribunal again post the Supreme Court's verdict on the classification issue. Enforcement of Demands and Refunds During Pendency: The Tribunal addressed concerns regarding the enforcement of demands and refunds during the pendency of the appeals. The learned Advocate for the appellants argued that the Revenue might proceed to enforce demands for the balance amount if the stay applications directing pre-deposit were disposed of. Conversely, the learned Special Counsel for the Revenue contended that the Revenue should be allowed to recover the outstanding amounts, as significant revenue was locked up in these appeals. The Tribunal concluded that maintaining the status quo was in the interest of justice. Therefore, no recovery or refund of amounts involved in these appeals would be processed during the period between the present order and the final verdict of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Ancillary Issues: The appellants raised concerns that ancillary issues, aside from the major classification issue, might remain unresolved. The Tribunal assured that even though the primary issue involved the classification of Steam Coal and Bituminous Coal, any ancillary issues raised in the respective appeals would be addressed after the Supreme Court's verdict on the main issue. Both sides were granted liberty to approach the Tribunal post the Supreme Court's decision. Conclusion: The appeals were disposed of with the liberty to the appellants to approach the Tribunal after the final verdict from the Hon'ble Supreme Court on the classification issue. The Tribunal emphasized maintaining the status quo regarding enforcement of demands and refunds during the intervening period. All connected miscellaneous applications and COs were also disposed of. The judgment underscores the importance of the Supreme Court's final decision on the classification issue, which will significantly impact the resolution of these appeals and any ancillary issues raised therein.
|
