2018 (10) TMI 845 - HC - Customs

Maintainability of ROM Application - application sought to be filed in form of the review of the earlier order - Held that - There is no reason to entertain this Appeal as the question as framed by the Revenue does not arise from the impugned order of the Tribunal - the impugned order relates to a rate of duty issue and therefore, not maintainable before this Court under Section 130 of the Act - appeal dismissed being not maintainable.

Summary

Issues:
Appeal under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962 challenging the order of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal; Question of law regarding consideration of ROM Applications by the Assessee and restoration of Appeals for fresh hearing; Maintainability of the Appeal before the High Court under Section 130 of the Act.

Analysis:
The judgment by the High Court of Bombay dealt with an appeal under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962, challenging the order of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Revenue raised a question of law questioning the Tribunal's decision to consider ROM Applications filed by the Assessee, leading to the restoration of the Appeals for a fresh hearing. The main contention was whether the Tribunal was correct in allowing the ROM Applications, which were essentially a review of the earlier order dismissing the Assessee's appeal. The High Court pointed out that the impugned order of the Tribunal had addressed the appropriate classification of external/portable hard disk drives and their entitlement to exemption under a specific notification, which related to the rate of duty of customs. Consequently, the High Court held that the appeal was not maintainable before them under Section 130 of the Act.

The learned Counsel for the Revenue argued that the question raised by the Revenue only challenged a part of the Tribunal's order that did not pertain to the rate of duty. However, the High Court noted that the question framed by the Revenue did not arise from the impugned order of the Tribunal. Despite the Revenue's insistence on pressing the question of law, the High Court found no merit in entertaining the appeal as the issue in question was related to the rate of duty, making it not maintainable before the High Court under Section 130 of the Act. Therefore, the High Court dismissed the appeal on the grounds of lack of maintainability, as the question raised did not stem from the impugned order of the Tribunal, which primarily dealt with the rate of duty issue.

In conclusion, the High Court's judgment emphasized the importance of the question of law raised being directly linked to the impugned order of the Tribunal for an appeal to be maintainable under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962. The decision highlighted the need for alignment between the issues raised in the appeal and the subject matter of the Tribunal's order, particularly concerning matters such as the rate of duty, to determine the maintainability of appeals before the High Court.