9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (12) TMI 488X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y and was dealing with a statutory Appeal, we would expect it not to dispose of the same by a cryptic and short order, more particularly, when such vital contentions have been raised as would have a material bearing on the outcome of the Appeal. It would also have some bearing on the pending cases. Customs Tariff Heading No.68022900 under which the goods are classifiable, then, whether there is any restriction in terms of the applicable policies or not ought to have been examined. Whether, the Commissioner was right in making a reference to the Customs Tariff Heading 68022200 should have been then considered. If that was permissible, the Tribunal was obliged to not only make a reference to the relevant findings of the Commissioner to up ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re needed for the purpose of the ultimate direction that we are inclined to issue in this Appeal. 4. The Respondent imported three consignments of goods declared as Processed Natural Limestone and sought clearance under the EPCG scheme vide three bills of entries, details of which are set out. The clearance was sought under the scheme against three EPCG license. The Respondent sought to classify the goods under Customs Tariff Heading 68022900. However, while assigning the bills of entry, the Appellant observed that the goods are appropriately classifiable under ITC(HS) Sr.No.68029200. Further in terms of the Foreign Trade Policy in force, the goods covered under the said heading were freely importable only if their unit value is more tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... imports if the CIF value was less than US$ 50 per square meter. The importers have declared the value of their goods to be less than US$ 50 per square meter and have insisted it to be the true transactions value. This being the case the goods are obviously restricted for imports. In this regards, it would also be relevant to mention that the General Notes on Import Export Policy make it very clear that restriction on import/export as prescribed in ITC (HS) Schedule is determined mainly by the description of the goods and nature of the restrictions in the schedule, code number being illustrative of classification but does not limit the description. As per the DGFT Notification Bi,18/2008 dated 30.06.2008, the import of marble, travertine, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion of the Dept.in loading the value is indefensible. 6. Aggrieved by this order, the Appeal was filed by the Respondent before the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal. This Appeal is allowed by the impugned order. The Revenue is, therefore, in the Appeal. 7. Mr. Jetly, learned counsel appearing in support of this Appeal submits that the Appeal raises substantial questions of law because the order of the Tribunal dated 14th May 2012 is cryptic in nature. It does not deal with any of the contentions and particularly the findings in the order of the Commissioner of Customs. It fails to take note of the vital findings which we have reproduced above. Mr. Jetly, submits that merely setting out the rival contentions would no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 9, therefore, holding that the goods are classifiable under Customs Tariff Heading 68022200 is not sustainable as the entry was not in existence at the time of importation. 9. Mr. Patel, therefore, would submit that this Appeal does not raise any substantial question of law and must be dismissed. 10. We have, with the assistance of the learned counsel, perused the paper book including the impugned order. In paragraph no.6 of the order under challenge the Tribunal holds as under: We have gone through the impugned order and ITC Policy Customs Tariff Heading and Notification cited before us. On examination of the said documents and the impugned order, we find that the adjudicating authority has classified the impugned goods under Cus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hese findings were not tenable as urged on behalf of the Respondent/original Appellant, then, the Tribunal should have held accordingly. We do not find any discussion much less a conclusive finding on this aspect of the matter. Resultantly, we are constrained to quash and set aside the impugned order on this short ground alone. 12. As a result of the above discussion, this Appeal by the Revenue succeeds. The impugned order is quashed and set aside. The Appeal filed by the Respondent is restored to the file of the Customs Excise and Service Tax Tribunal and we direct the Tribunal to dispose of the Appeal afresh on merits and in accordance with law without being influenced by any of the earlier observations and findings. All contentions of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
