9911796707
TMI Blog1985 (4) TMI 179X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of hosiery goods. The conversion of the fibre into yarn on job basis was done at J.C. Mills Limited, Gwalior. The Collector of Customs, held that the appellants were not entitled to import viscose staple fibre as raw material for the manufacture of knitted fibre (hosiery goods) inasmuch as the staple fibre was really the raw materials for the manufacture of yarn and it was the yarn so manufactured that was the raw materials for the manufacture of the hosiery goods. On this basis, the imports were held as unauthorised and the goods were confiscated. They were, however, allowed to redeem the goods on payment of Rs. 3,000/- each. The appeal before the Central Board of Excise and Customs, New Delhi, was also dismissed on the same ground. 2. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e point or points on which decision by the third (or more) Member(s) of the Tribunal is required. 8. The basis of Shri Sundar Rajan s apprehension is that after the matter was heard by the Regional Bench no judgment was delivered by either of the Members of the Bench nor has the matter been referred to the third (or more) Member(s) of the Appellate Tribunal as provided for under sub-section 5 of Section 129C of the Customs Act, 1962. 9. Shri Sundar Rajan read out the provisions of sub-section 5 of Section 129C of the Customs Act, 1962 which are as under :- If the members of a Bench differ in opinion on any point, the point shall be decided according to the opinion of the majority, if there is a majority, but if the members are equa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d this matter to Special Bench C for hearing. There is no question to refer the points of difference to third Member or Members as Shri Sundar Rajan wants. There is no difference of opinion among the members comprising the Bench who heard the appeal. 12. Shri Sundar Rajan has not disputed the powers of the President to constitute larger Bench for hearing the appeals if he is required to do so in maintaining the uniformity in the decisions given by the various Benches of the Tribunal. The objection of Shri Sundar Rajan is that only points of difference should have been referred to a third member and not the entire appeal. We do not find any force in this contention of Shri Sundar Rajan. Sub-section 5 of Section 129C of the Customs Act, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o avoid contradictory decisions of two Bench of the same status. 13. Under these circumstances, we find no force in this preliminary objection raised by Shri Sundar Rajan, Departmental Representative and reject the same. 14. [Order per : H.R. Syiem, Member (T)]. - I am in agreement with Mr. Sundar Rajan s arguments before this Bench. Section 129C(5) of the Customs Act, 1962 permits a reference to be made to one or more other Members of the Appellate Tribunal only if the Members of the Bench, i.e., the Bench that first heard the appeal, differ in opinion on any point. If the Members are equally divided, the matter or point on which they differ can be heard and decided by one or more Members and the points of dispute shall be decided in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the sub-section begins with these words. Since the proceedings before the second Bench of three Members is not in accordance with the Act, I hold the objections raised by the department to be valid. EDITOR S COMMENTS The minority judgment is correct inasmuch as the matter regarding the type of Benches and their respective jurisdiction has specifically been dealt with under Sections 129C (2), (3) (4) of the Customs Act, 1962. Sub-section (2) thereof provides that a Bench of the Tribunal shall consist of one judicial member and one technical member but subject to the provision of sub-sections (3) (4). Under sub-section (3) a Special bench of not less than two members has to hear the cases of valuation and rate of duty. The sub-sectio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... member as no such expression has been used in sub-section (2) of Section 129C of the Customs Act. Any other interpretation will make the expression extrated above as redundant. There is another aspect of the matter that is even if findings of the case reported in 1983 E.L.T. 626 were not acceptable to the West Regional Bench that first heard the present appeal, it is not clear under what provision the appeal was ordered to be referred to the Hon ble President for constitution of a larger Bench. It is felt that it was the duty of the West Regional Bench to give its verdict even if it holds a contrary view to the ratio of the case reported in 1983 E.L.T. 626 because the doctorine of President is not the rule of law and the decision of one ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
