Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2024 (11) TMI 415

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the Customs Act, 1962. HELD THAT:- In the present case, the petitioner s grievance is, essentially, regarding the rate of duty as is imposed on the goods in question as the rate of duty on the goods falling in CTH 9616 is higher than the rate of duties specified for products falling under CTH 8424. The present appeal is, accordingly, dismissed being not maintainable. The pending application also stands disposed of. - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU AND HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SWARANA KANTA SHARMA For the Appellant Through: Mr Priyadarshi Manish, Ms Anjali Jha Manish and Ms Shambhavi Singh, Advocates. For the Respondent Through: Mr Aditya Singla, SSC, Mr Ritwik Shah, Ms Medha and Mr Umang Misra, Advocates for CBIC. VIBHU BAKHRU, J. ( .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... charged ʮ 7.5% 8424 20 00 -Spray guns and similar appliances ʮ 7.5% 8424 90 00 Parts Kg 7.5% 5. According to the Revenue, the said goods fall in CTH 9616, which is set out below:- 9616 Scents sprays and similar toilet sprays, and mounts and heads therefor; powder-puffs and pads for the application of cosmetics or toilet preparations 9616 10 -Scent sprays and similar toilet sprays and mounts and heads therefor; 9616 10 10 ---Scents sprays and similar toilet sprays kg 20% 9616 10 20 ---Mounts and Heads kg 20% 6. Mr Singla, learned counsel appearing for the Revenue submits that the issue is, essentially, as to the rate of the tax, and therefore, the appeal against the impugned order passed by the learned CESTAT would lie with the Sup .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ation 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 of it for the purposes of this sub-section . The Explanation saved as the expression includes the determination of a question relating to the rate of duty; to the valuation of goods for purposes of assessment; to the classification of goods under the tariff and whether or not they are covered by an exemption notification; and whether the value of goods for purposes/of assessment should be enhanced or reduced having regard to certain matters that the said Act provides for. Although this Expression expressly confines the definition of the said expression to sub-section (5) of Sec .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... are covered by exemption notification; whether value for the purpose of assessment should be enhanced or reduced etc. It was further observed that statutory definition accords to the meaning given to the expression above. For the purpose of present controversy we are inclined to ignore and not take into consideration explanation 5 to Section 129D or sub-section (5) to Section 35E. However, in spite of the said position, we do not think that the decision in the case of Delhi Gymkhana Club Ltd. (supra) is required to be referred to a Larger Bench. Determination of any question relating to rate of tax would necessarily directly and proximately involve the question, whether activity falls within the charging Section and Service Tax is leviable .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed and decided has a relation to the rate of duty of customs. The appeal is accordingly held to be not maintainable. The appellant obviously has to approach the Supreme Court under Section 130E of the Customs Act, 1962. We clarify that we have not expressed any view on the merits of the appeal. 9. The appeal is accordingly dismissed as not maintainable. 7. In the present case, the petitioner s grievance is, essentially, regarding the rate of duty as is imposed on the goods in question as the rate of duty on the goods falling in CTH 9616 is higher than the rate of duties specified for products falling under CTH 8424. 8. The present appeal is, accordingly, dismissed being not maintainable. The pending application also stands disposed of. - .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates