2012 (5) TMI 456 - AT - Customs

Rate of CVD in respect of goods where full exemption withdrawn - 1% or 5% - Whether the benefit of Notification No. 1/2011 CE dated 1.3.2011 is available to the impugned goods or not - assessee contested that impugned assessment orders on the impugned Bills of Entry No. 3481711 was passed by Assessing Authority rejecting the appellant s claim of CVD without passing a speaking order in terms of Section 17(5) of Customs Act, 1962 - Held that - The impugned assessment order is set aside and the concerned authority is directed to pass a speaking order within 15 days of the receipt of this order failing which the appellants appeal shall be treated as allowed - in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues Involved:
Delay in filing appeal due to incorrect Bill of Entry causing retrieval delay, benefit of Notification No. 1/2011 availability to impugned goods, rejection of CVD claim by Assessing Authority, absence of speaking order under Section 17(5) of Customs Act, 1962, remand of matter to assessing authority, disposal of COD application, Stay petition, and appeal.

Delay in Filing Appeal:
The delay in filing the appeal, attributed to the incorrect Bill of Entry mentioned in the Commissionerate, caused a delay in retrieving relevant documents until the correct number was provided. The Tribunal condoned the delay of around 105 days as it found a short issue involved and proceeded to decide the stay petition and appeal.

Benefit of Notification No. 1/2011:
The issue revolved around whether the benefit of Notification No. 1/2011 dated 1.3.2011 was available to the impugned goods. The Commissioner (Appeals) found that the Assessing Authority rejected the appellant's claim of CVD at 1% and charged it at 5% without passing a speaking order under Section 17(5) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the impugned assessment order and directed the assessing authority to pass a speaking order within 15 days; failure to do so would treat the appellant's appeal as allowed with consequential relief.

Absence of Speaking Order under Section 17(5) of Customs Act, 1962:
The appellate authority did not provide any finding on the merits of the case but remanded the matter to the assessing authority with directions to pass a speaking order under Section 17(5) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal upheld this decision, emphasizing the necessity of a reasoned order for proper understanding by the appellate authority.

Remand of Matter to Assessing Authority:
The Tribunal found no infirmity in the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals) as the Assessing Officer was required to pass a speaking order under Section 17(5) of the Customs Act, 1962. The absence of a reasoned order made it challenging for the appellate authority to assess the contentions of both sides, justifying the remand of the matter.

Disposal of COD Application, Stay Petition, and Appeal:
The Tribunal disposed of the COD application, Stay petition, and appeal in the manner described in the judgment, bringing the legal proceedings to a conclusion.