2018 (9) TMI 1738 - HC - Customs

Maintainability of Appeal - Classification of imported goods - case of Revenue is that the issue of classification is the secondary issue and the primary issue is with regard to misdeclaration made by the Respondent - Held that - If the classification as filed by the Respondent is accepted, there could be no question of mis-declaration. The primary issue to be decided, is appropriate classification of the imported goods and only thereafter the issue of mis-declaration may arise for consideration - it is the case that rate of duty issue and not within our jurisdiction under Section 130 of the Act. The remedy, if any, is to file an appeal before the Hon ble Supreme Court from the impugned order dated 20th March, 2018. Appeal disposed off as not maintainable.

Summary

Issues involved:
Challenge to order of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal on appropriate classification of imported goods under Customs Act, 1962.

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to an appeal challenging the order of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal regarding the classification of imported goods under the Customs Act, 1962. The appellant raised a question of law concerning the classification of the goods under specific headings of the Act. However, the Court pointed out that the issue of appropriate classification falls outside its jurisdiction as per Section 130(1) of the Act. The primary contention raised by the appellant was regarding the misdeclaration made by the respondent in classifying the goods under a particular heading. The Court emphasized that the main issue to be determined was the correct classification of the imported goods, and only then could the question of misdeclaration be addressed. It was clarified that if the classification provided by the respondent was accepted, there would be no basis for alleging misdeclaration. The Court concluded that the issue of rate of duty was not within its jurisdiction under Section 130 of the Act and suggested that any further remedy could be sought by filing an appeal before the Supreme Court against the impugned order. Consequently, the Court disposed of the appeal, deeming it not maintainable before them. Furthermore, the Notice of Motion in the appeal was also disposed of as infructuous in light of the disposal of the main appeal.