9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (11) TMI 723X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6, List 8, Part I of the above Policy 1988-91. The said entry stood for Printed circuit boards other than those in Appendix 3 Part A . On examination of the goods and scrutiny of the provisions of the Policy, the Customs authorities took the stand that Populated PCBs were specifically covered by Appendix 2, Part B, and therefore it was a restricted item which could be imported only against a specific import licence. The importer contested this stand of the department. Thus a dispute arose between the department and the appellant. The relevant show-cause notice was adjudicated upon by the ld. Collector of Customs by an order dated 30-4-1992. The ld. Collector held the Populated PCBs to be covered under Entry 135 of Appendix 2, Part B of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng so, he also made certain references to, and remarks about, the Tribunal s decision in Atari (India) Electronics case. We refrain from commenting itemwise on the Collector s references/remarks as, we think, it is beyond the scope of this appeal. The relevant paragraphs (16 to 21) are reproduced below :- 16. I will now deal with the decision of the Calcutta Regional Bench of the Tribunal in these case of M/s. Atari which has been cited by the Counsel in support of his proposition. 17. The Tribunal has taken the view that since the O.G.L. entry does not exclude goods figuring in Appx-2, Part B, the exclusion will only of those printed circuit boards which figure in Appx-3, Part-A. I have carefully gone through the Tribunal s decision a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ry which permits import of printed circuit boards not covered by Appx-3, Part- A as a specific entry for import of all types of printed circuit boards particularly populated printed circuit boards and that in terms of Para 21(f) it should be held that this entry allows import of populated printed circuit boards specifically. 19. With respect, therefore, the Tribunal s order does not correctly interpret the provisions of the policy nor the provisions of the various Appendices in this order. In fact, the Calcutta Custom House made an application to the Tribunal to refer this question of law to the High Court. So far as the Regional Bench of the Tribunal is concerned, their decisions on facts are final and so far as law points are concerned, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted category of Appx-2, Part B under O.G.L., I am unable to follow this decision as a binding precedent for all time to come. The stakes involved in the case decided by the Calcutta Regional Bench were hardly to the tune of Rs. 30,000/- and Rs. 25,000/- as fine in lieu of confiscation, while following this decision of the Tribunal in large number of cases benefit was sought to be derived by the importers in Bombay where in view of the decision of the Calcutta Bench of the Tribunal the Bombay High Court started giving clearance of the goods provisionally vide interim orders but permitted the department to adjudicate the cases later on. 21. Since in my view the Tribunal s decision is totally wrong, and a wrong decision cannot be perpetuated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the Supreme Court on questions of law can bind the customs authorities. His ignorance of the basic tenets of judicial discipline is, indeed, pitiable. Ld. Collector should have paid heed to the relevant rulings of the Hon ble Supreme Court. In the case of Union of India v. Kamlakshi Finance Corporation Ltd. - 1991 (55) E.L.T. 433 (S.C.), their Lordships had made the following observations : .......It cannot be too vehemently emphasised that it is of utmost importance that, in disposing of the quasi-judicial issues before them, revenue officers are bound by the decisions of the appellate authorities. The order of the Appellate Collector is binding on the Assistant Collectors working within his jurisdiction and the order of the Tribuna ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Collector fortunately has not claimed that the issue on hand was covered by any decision of the jurisdictional High Court or of the Supreme Court. Had there been any such decision, the same, of course, would have held the field. In the absence of such decision, the decision of the Tribunal had binding effect and the Collector had no option to defy the same. He had no business to sit in judgment over the Tribunal s decision, though it was open to him to say that the Tribunal s decision was not applicable on account of distinguishability of the facts of the case. The Collector did not even attempt to distinguish the facts of his case from those of Atari (India) Electronics case. He never noted anywhere in the impugned order that the Tribunal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
