2018 (3) TMI 875 - AT - Customs

Whether the appellant is liable to pay duty on the export made under shipping bill no. 5475349 dated 05.05.2008 as prevailing on the date of export which became nil by N/N. 77/2008-Cus dated 13.6.2008? Held that - this Tribunal has already decided the caption issue in the case of M/s Jindal Saw Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Customs (Export), Nhava Sheva 2018 (2) TMI 246 - CESTAT MUMBAI wherein it has been held that the appellant is liable to pay duty @ 10% for export of the goods. Appeal dismissed - decided against appellant.

Summary

Issues Involved:
Whether the appellant is liable to pay duty on the export made under a specific shipping bill as prevailing on the date of export which became nil by a subsequent notification.

Analysis:
The issue in the present case revolves around the liability of the appellant to pay duty on exports based on the prevailing rate at the time of export. The appellant's advocate, Ms. Manasi Patil, acknowledged a previous judgment in the appellant's own case where the appeals were dismissed, suggesting a similar outcome in the current case. On the other hand, the Revenue representative, Shri Chatru Singh, supported the impugned order. Upon careful consideration, the Tribunal referred to a previous decision in Appeal No. C/212-215/09, where it was held that the appellant is indeed liable to pay duty at a rate of 10% for the export of goods. The Tribunal emphasized that the duty was correctly chargeable during the relevant period and that the government's power under Section 28A of the Customs Act, 1962 was not exercised in this case. The Tribunal also noted that previous judgments cited by the appellant's counsel were not directly applicable to the current scenario, and the Tribunal is bound to follow the rules and notifications issued under the Customs Act, 1962.

The Tribunal's detailed analysis highlighted the statutory provisions and the government's power regarding the recovery of duties. The Tribunal emphasized that the duty on the export of Iron & Steel pipes/tubes was chargeable at 10% based on the prevailing law at the time. The Tribunal's decision was based on a thorough examination of the legal framework and previous judgments, ultimately upholding the impugned order and dismissing the appeals. The Tribunal's adherence to the statutory provisions and its interpretation of the law played a crucial role in determining the appellant's liability to pay duty on the exports in question. The judgment serves as a reminder of the importance of complying with the Customs Act and following established legal principles in such matters.