9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (3) TMI 902X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act, the rate of Special Additional Duty will not be payable by the assessee. That issue, we find, cannot be agitated before this Court in view of the specific provision under Section 130(1) of the Customs Act. Therefore, the objection of the learned counsel for the first respondent is sustained. - appeal is not maintainable - Following decision of Navin Chemicals Manufacturing & Trading Co. Ltd. - Vs-Collector of Customs [1993 (9) TMI 107 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] - Decided against Revenue. - Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 1184 of 2008 - - - Dated:- 27-2-2015 - R. Sudhakar And R. Karuppiah,JJ. For the Appellant : Mr. P. Mahaadevan For the Respondents : Mr. T. Ramesh - R1 JUDGMENT (Delivered by R. Sudhakar,J.) Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tribunal. The Tribunal, allowed the appeal granting relief to the importer holding that the assessee was constrained to pay SAD on the goods due to no fault off theirs. Aggrieved by the said order of the Tribunal, the Revenue is before this Court. 3. The primary objection that has been raised by the counsel for the first respondent is that the appeal in terms of Section 130 of the Customs Act is not maintainable, as the primary issue in this case is in relation to the rate of Special Additional Duty payable. 4. Heard learned Standing counsel appearing for the appellant and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent and perused the materials placed before this Court. 5. Here is a case where the goods arrived in port on 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pecial Additional Duty will not be payable by the assessee. That issue, we find, cannot be agitated before this Court in view of the specific provision under Section 130(1) of the Customs Act. Therefore, the objection of the learned counsel for the first respondent is sustained. 8. This view was fortified by the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Navin Chemicals Manufacturing Trading Co. Ltd. - Vs-Collector of Customs (1993 (68) ELT 3 (SC)), wherein, the Supreme Court held as follows: 11. It will be seen that sub-section (5) uses the said expression determination of any question having a relation to the rate of duty or to the value of goods for the purposes of assessment and the Explanation thereto provides a definition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re, for the purposes of assessment, questions arise directly and proximately as to the rate of duty or the value of the goods. 12. This, then, is the test for the purposes of determining whether or not an appeal should be heard by a Special Bench of CEGAT, whether or not a reference by CEGAT lies to the High Court and whether or not an appeal lies directly to the Supreme Court from a decision of CEGAT: does the question that requires determination have a direct and proximate relation, for the purposes of assessment, to the rate of duty applicable to the goods or to the value of the goods. (emphasis supplied) 9. For the foregoing reasons, we hold that this appeal is not maintainable and accordingly, the same is dismissed giving libe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
