2019 (6) TMI 981 - HC - Customs

Benefit of N/N. 64/88-CUS dated 1st March 1988 - Whether the CESTAT was right in law in setting aside the duty demand, confiscation and penalty? - HELD THAT - This Court admitted the appeal of the Revenue on the issue of admissibility of Notification No. 64/88-CUS dated 1st March 1988. In the above view, it is submitted that this Court should exercise the jurisdiction to entertain this appeal. This appeal is adjourned to 1st July 2019.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to order of Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal granting benefit of Notification No.64/88-CUS dated 1st March 1988 under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962.

Analysis:
1. The appeal challenges the order of the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal) dated 14th August 2018, which granted the respondents the benefit of Notification No.64/88-CUS dated 1st March 1988 under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962.

2. The main question raised by the Revenue in this appeal pertains to the entitlement of the respondent to the benefit of Notification No. 64/88-CUS dated 1st March 1988. This issue potentially impacts the rate of duty of customs for the purpose of assessment.

3. The jurisdiction of the High Court to entertain this appeal under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962 is brought into question, considering whether the issue at hand falls within the purview of rate of duty, which may be beyond the Court's jurisdiction.

4. The appellant's counsel referred to a previous case where the Revenue withdrew its appeal before the High Court, highlighting the relevance of the issue at hand and the Court's jurisdiction to adjudicate on the matter.

5. The Court acknowledged the need to hear both the Revenue and the respondent on the issue of jurisdiction to entertain appeals related to the grant of exemption notifications, emphasizing the importance of interpreting Sections 130 and 130E of the Customs Act, 1962 appropriately.

6. Despite initial concerns regarding the nature of the issue, the Court decided to defer a final decision on its jurisdiction, opting to hear arguments from both parties before making a determination. The appellant was directed to serve a copy of the order to the respondent for further proceedings.

7. The Court, at the appellant's request, adjourned the appeal to 1st July 2019 to allow for adequate preparation and presentation of arguments before reaching a final decision on the matter.