2012 (7) TMI 86 - AT - Customs

Import of Crude Palm Sterin - Classification - Chapter Heading 15.11 or 38.23. - benefit of Notification No.21/2002-Cus, dt.1.3.2002. - differential duty - Board s circular dt.26.7.2011 - held that - pre deposit ordered - matter remanded back to decide afresh in view of the Board s circular dt.26.7.2011 and Hon ble Supreme Court s judgment in the case of Jocil Ltd (2010 (12) TMI 24 (SC))

Summary

Issues: Stay petition for waiver of pre-deposit of differential duty; Classification of imported goods under different heading; Applicability of Notification No.21/2002-Cus; Consideration of Board's circular and Supreme Court judgment; Direction to deposit differential duty amount; Remand of matters for fresh consideration by adjudicating authority.

Analysis:

The Stay Petition was filed seeking waiver of pre-deposit of an amount confirmed as differential duty payable by the appellant due to the import of goods (Crude Palm Sterin) under a different heading. The appellant claimed that the goods should be classified under a specific chapter heading and argued that they are not eligible for the benefit of Notification No.21/2002-Cus. The Tribunal noted that the appeal itself could be disposed of at that point, considering the recent judgment of the Supreme Court in a similar case. The appellant referred to a circular by the Board indicating the appropriate chapter heading for the imported product and offered to execute a bank guarantee for the approximate amount of the differential duty. The Tribunal found the offer reasonable and directed the appellant to deposit the specified amount within a set timeframe for further proceedings.

The Tribunal acknowledged the need for the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, who assessed the disputed Bills of Entry, to reconsider the classification issue in light of the Board's circular and the Supreme Court judgment. The adjudicating authority was instructed to follow the principles of natural justice in the reevaluation process. The impugned order was set aside, and the matters were remanded for a fresh consideration, with all issues left open for review. Additionally, the application by the Revenue for an out-of-turn hearing of the appeal was disposed of since the appeal itself had been addressed and resolved by the Tribunal. The judgment emphasized the importance of proper classification, adherence to legal guidelines, and the fair treatment of all parties involved in the dispute.