2014 (11) TMI 1097 - HC - Customs

Maintainability of appeal - Section 130 of the Customs Act 1962 - issue relates to rate of duty of customs which would include question of levy of duty on re-import - Held that - the decision in the case of Commissioner of Service Tax v. Ernst and Young Private Limited 2014 (2) TMI 1133 - DELHI HIGH COURT relied upon where it was held that the question of levy of duty would be included and also relate to rate of duty. Therefore it is not possible to accept the contention of the Revenue that the present appeals would be maintainable because the issue relates to levy of duty and not rate of duty. Section 130 of the Act in clear terms stipulates that an appeal would lie before the High Court when it does not relate to an order relating among other things to determination of any question having a relation to rate of duty of Customs or value of the goods for the purpose of assessment. The issue raised in the present appeals relates to levy of customs duty on re-import of goods which had earlier been exported - appeal not maintainable under Section 130 of the Act and are accordingly directed to be returned - appellant may file an appeal under Section 130E of the Act.

Summary

Issues:
1. Maintainability of appeals under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962.
2. Interpretation of the term "levy of duty" in relation to the rate of duty.
3. Applicability of Section 130E of the Act in the present appeals.
4. Consideration of the decision in Commissioner of Service Tax v. Ernst and Young Private Limited.
5. Dispute regarding levy of Customs duty on re-import of goods.
6. Tribunal's decision in favor of the respondent-assessee based on Notification No. 94/96-Cus.

Analysis:

1. The High Court considered the maintainability of three appeals filed by the Revenue under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962. The Court noted that the appeals related to the levy of Customs duty on re-import of goods and not to the rate of duty. The appellant contended that the appeals were maintainable under Section 130E of the Act.

2. The Court referred to a previous decision in Commissioner of Service Tax v. Ernst and Young Private Limited, where it was held that the question of levy of duty would include and relate to the rate of duty. The Court emphasized that Section 130 of the Act allows an appeal before the High Court when it does not relate to the determination of any question concerning the rate of duty of Customs or the value of goods for assessment.

3. Based on the interpretation of the term "levy of duty" and the precedent set in the Ernst and Young Private Limited case, the Court concluded that the present appeals were not maintainable before the High Court under Section 130 of the Act. Therefore, the appeals were directed to be returned, and the appellant was given the option to file an appeal under Section 130E of the Act.

4. The Court specifically addressed the issue of Customs duty on the re-import of goods, where the respondent-assessee claimed that no duty was payable based on Notification No. 94/96-Cus. The Tribunal had ruled in favor of the respondent-assessee in this regard, leading to the Court's decision on the maintainability of the appeals.

5. In light of the Tribunal's decision and the legal principles governing the interpretation of the Customs Act, the High Court held that the appeals were not maintainable under Section 130 and were therefore returned. The Court declined to issue notice on the application for condonation of delay, leaving the option open for the appellant to pursue an appeal under Section 130E of the Act.