2019 (10) TMI 408 - AT - Central Excise

Duty Drawback - fixation of brand rate of duty drawback - Section 129(1)(b) of the Customs Act, 1962 - HELD THAT - From Section 129(1)(b) of the Customs Act, 1962, it is amply clear that where the impugned order is passed by Commissioner (Appeals) and the issue involved is of payment of drawback, the proper authority before the application is to be made is Revisionary Authority, Govt. of India. Therefore, this Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal relating to issue involved of payment of drawback. This Tribunal has no jurisdiction in present appeals - the appeals are dismissed as non-maintainable.

Summary

Issues:
1. Maintainability of appeals before the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Ahmedabad regarding the fixation of brand rate of duty drawback.

Analysis:
The issue raised in the case was the maintainability of appeals before the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Ahmedabad concerning the fixation of brand rate of duty drawback. The respondent's counsel argued that as per Section 129(1)(b) of the Customs Act, 1962, matters related to duty drawback fall under the jurisdiction of the revisionary authority, Govt. of India, when the impugned orders are passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). The counsel relied on a previous decision of the Tribunal in CCE, Rajkot vs. Essar Oil Limited, emphasizing the same point.

The appellant, represented by the Assistant Commissioner (AR), contended that the decision in the case of Essar Oil Limited had been appealed before the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court, which had admitted the appeal. The Tribunal carefully examined Section 129(1)(b) of the Customs Act, which outlines the orders that can be appealed before the Appellate Tribunal. It was noted that when the impugned order is passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) and the issue pertains to the payment of drawback, the proper authority for appeal is the Revisionary Authority, Govt. of India. Therefore, the Tribunal concluded that it lacked jurisdiction to entertain appeals related to the payment of drawback, as per the statutory provisions and the decision in the Essar Oil Limited case. Despite the Revenue challenging the Tribunal's order before the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court, the absence of a stay on the Tribunal's order led to the dismissal of the appeals as non-maintainable. The Revenue was granted liberty to file a revision application before the appropriate authority.

In summary, the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Ahmedabad held that it did not have jurisdiction to entertain appeals concerning the payment of drawback when the impugned orders were passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), as per the provisions of Section 129(1)(b) of the Customs Act, 1962. The dismissal of the appeals was based on the understanding that such matters fell under the purview of the Revisionary Authority, Govt. of India, in line with the decision in the Essar Oil Limited case.