Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Colourtex Industries Ltd. Versus Union Of India

2015 (10) TMI 1848 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT

Waiver of pre deposit - validity of interim order passed by the tribunal - tribunal granted 50% stay - none of the orders are reasoned orders assigning any reasons for asking the petitioner to pre-deposit 50% of the customs duty - Benefit of CVD - Held that:- All that is stated in the orders dismissing the applications for modification is that the Tribunal does not find any merit in the applications; however, the merits of the applications have not been discussed in any of the orders passed by t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

lant about its right is no reason to non-suit the petitioner on the ground that other similarly situated assessees have not thought it fit to move applications for modification of the order of pre-deposit. When the petitioner has moved an application for modification before the Tribunal and has made out a case of changed circumstances and there is a convention to grant complete waiver of pre-deposit when the matter is referred to the Larger Bench, there was no reason for the Tribunal not to gran .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

afresh, however, considering the fact that in the case of similarly situated assessees, the Tribunal has already granted complete waiver of pre-deposit and it is a convention to grant waiver of pre-deposit in case the matter is referred to the Larger Bench, no fruitful purpose would be served in remanding the matters to the Tribunal. - Stay granted. - SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2957 of 2015 And 4210 of 2015 - Dated:- 24-9-2015 - MS. HARSHA DEVANI AND MR. A.G.URAIZEE, JJ For the Petitioner : .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

admission stage itself. 2. For the sake of convenience, reference is made to the facts as appear in Special Civil Application No.2957 of 2015. The petitioner is a limited company engaged in the manufacture of dyes and chemicals in its factories in Sachin and Pandesara of Surat district. The petitioner company imported two consignments each, of Indonesian steam coal for use in its Sachin factory and Pandesara factory respectively, during May 2014 and paid dues by availing concessional duty under .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

espect of Unit-2 with interest, by reclassifying imported coal as bituminous coal. Penalties of ₹ 8,00,000/- and ₹ 8,50,000/- respectively, also came to be imposed on the two factories. Against the two orders-inoriginal, the petitioner company preferred two appeals with stay applications before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad (hereinafter referred to as the Appellate Tribunal ). On the stay applications filed by the petitioner, the Appellate Tribunal .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d 26.11.2014 on the ground that in view of a difference in opinion on the classification issue of steam coal as bituminous coal, the CESTAT (Chennai Bench) had referred the matter to a larger Bench. That the Mumbai Bench of the CESTAT has extended the benefit of concessional CVD for coal imported from Indonesia as well as the benefit of limitation while ordering pre-deposit in identical matters. In view of divergent views expressed by other Benches, the petitioner prayed for modification of the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

me to be granted for reporting compliance by 1.1.2015. It appears that on 8.12.2014, a Bench of the Appellate Tribunal in the case of a similarly situated assessee, M/s. Rainbow Papers Ltd. waived the pre-deposit of the duty along with interest and penalties till the disposal of the appeal as the issue as to whether noncoking coals imported by the applicant declared as steam coal would be classified as bituminous coal had been referred by the Chennai Bench of the Tribunal to the Larger Bench. Th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

casion, the learned counsel sought time for compliance of stay orders and, accordingly, did not find any reason to entertain the modification applications at that stage and dismissed the appeals for non-compliance of the said orders. The modification applications filed by the petitioner also came to be dismissed. 3. Mr. S. S. Iyer, learned counsel for the petitioner invited the attention of the court to the order dated 8.12.2014 passed by the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Rainbow Papers Ltd. wher .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ed reliance upon the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of Union of India v. Sir Hurkisondas Norottam Hospital & Medical Research Centre, 2009 (234) ELT 426 (Bom.), wherein the court, after referring to its earlier decision in the case of Baron International Ltd. v. Union of India, 2004 (163) E.L.T. 150 (Bom.) as well as the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Vadodara v. Steelco Gujarat Ltd., 2004 (163) ELT 403 (SC), has held thus: 6. Read .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

und of mistake apparent on the face of record, one of the shades of power to review appears to have been conceded by the legislature in favour of the Tribunal so as to enable the Tribunal to rectify its mistake or error and to modify its order. Tribunal cannot review its order but can always modify. 3.2 Reliance was placed upon the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of Sarla Performance Fibers Ltd. v. Union of India, 2008 (226) ELT 45 (Bom.), wherein the court has held that there is a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n of the Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v. West Coast Paper Mills Ltd., 2004 (164) ELT 375 (SC), for the proposition that once a special leave is granted and the appeal is admitted the correctness or otherwise of the judgment of the Tribunal becomes wide open. In such an appeal, the court is entitled to go into both questions of fact as well as law. In such an event the correctness of the judgment is in jeopardy. It was pointed out that on a similar question the Supreme Court has ad .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

) to review his order. But such a power is available to the Tribunal under section 35C(2) of the Central Excise Act to rectify any mistake apparent on the record. 3.5 Reference was made to the various orders passed by the different Benches of the Tribunal, wherein it has been observed that once the issue is referred to the Larger Bench, as a convention, waiver of pre-deposit of the amount involved, needs to be allowed. It was submitted that, therefore, it is a settled convention that whenever a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ndition of depositing 50% of the duty. It was submitted that reliance placed by the petitioner on the interim order passed in the case of another assessee is misconceived, inasmuch as, the interim order passed by the Tribunal in another matter is not binding on the Tribunal while deciding the review/modification application. According to the learned counsel, a subsequent change in law is no ground to seek a review/ modification in view of the Explanation to rule 1 of Order XLVII of the Code of C .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ade by the petitioner, it was submitted that there is no averment with regard to undue hardship. It was submitted that while asking the petitioner to deposit 50% of the amount of customs duty, the Tribunal had placed reliance upon its previous order which has subsequently been confirmed by this court in the case of Asian Natural Resources (India) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, 2015 (317) ELT 233 (Guj.). It was contended that the Tribunal is bound by its previous decision and, accordingly, whil .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

High Court in the case of Baron International Ltd. v. Union of India, 2004 (163) ELT 150 (Bom.), wherein it has been held thus: 7. The CEGAT must remember that it has no power to review its own order. No such power has been conferred on CEGAT by the legislature. In absence of such power, it cannot exercise review jurisdiction. Party before CEGAT can only seek modification of the order of CEGAT. For seeking modification, a prima facie; case in that behalf is required to be made out in the pleadi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sily be saved by the CEGAT, if application moved in this behalf is prima facie, examined by CEGAT to find out whether any change in circumstances after the previous order, is shown with sufficient material in that behalf; or any other reason prima facie; exists warranting modification of the previous order on the ground which was not available when the previous order was made. It was submitted that as Tribunal does not have any powers of review, it was wholly justified in rejecting the applicati .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ssees who have paid the amount of pre-deposit. It was submitted that the position would have been different if the Larger Bench had held in favour of the assessee on merits, however, as on date, except that the matter has been referred to the Larger Bench, the position is the same. It was contended that there was a conflict which is now recognized but the dispute is yet to be resolved and, therefore, qua pre-deposit it may not be said that there are any changed circumstances warranting exercise .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

y a small fraction of the amount that the appellant was liable to pay under the order in original. It was submitted that the court after recording that the Tribunal had applied its mind to the facts of the case and had directed pre-deposit of only a small fraction of the demand, it sustained the said order. It was submitted that the facts of the said case are different from the facts of the present case, inasmuch as, in this case the Tribunal has directed payment of 50% of the duty by way of pre .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ation application was filed before the dismissal of the appeal and that the petitioner was duly entitled to file such application. 5.1 The learned counsel further made reference to section 129C of the Customs Act, 1962 and more particularly, sub- sections (6) and (7) thereof to submit that the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure would be applicable to the limited extent specified therein and no more. It was contended that the Customs Act is a complete Code in itself and the provisions of t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ective parties and has perused the decisions cited at the Bar. 7. The facts as noted hereinabove reveal that on the first application made by the petitioner seeking stay of the recovery under the order-in-original, the Tribunal by an order dated 29.9.2014 had directed deposit of 50% of the customs duty as confirmed by the adjudicating authority, only on the ground that in the case of similarly situated appellants such direction had been issued. The said order does not give any other reason for n .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ssue of steam coal as bituminous coal, between two Benches of CESTAT (Chennai Bench) and the Mumbai Bench of CESTAT has extended the benefit of concessional CVD for coal imported from Indonesia as well as the benefit of limitation while ordering pre-deposit in identical matters. In view of divergent views on the issue by the other Benches, the petitioner sought modification of the earlier stay order by granting waiver of pre-deposit and unconditional stay of recovery of the entire customs duty, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ner once again moved an application for modification before the Tribunal on the ground that subsequent to the stay orders passed by the Tribunal, it has been reported that the CESTAT (Chennai Bench) has referred the matter of classification of Indonesian Coal to a Larger Bench due to difference of opinion between the CESTAT benches at Bangalore and Chennai and that the Ahmedabad Bench of the CESTAT has been subsequently extending the benefit of unconditional stay for coal imported from Indonesia .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n applications filed by it, what emerges is that none of the orders are reasoned orders assigning any reasons for asking the petitioner to pre-deposit 50% of the customs duty or as to why the application for modification should not be accepted. All that is stated in the orders dismissing the applications for modification is that the Tribunal does not find any merit in the applications; however, the merits of the applications have not been discussed in any of the orders passed by the Tribunal. 9. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Customs, (supra) reveals that the court has categorically noted that the Tribunal has considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties at length and has thereafter come to its conclusion. The court has further noted that the Tribunal had directed payment of only a small fraction of the amount that the appellant there was liable to pay under the order in original. Thus, it cannot be said that the petitioner herein is similarly situated to the said appellant, inasm .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Bombay High Court in the case of Union of India v. Sir Hurkisondas Norottam Hospital & Medical Research Centre, (supra), the Tribunal has powers to rectify its mistake or error and to modify its order. 11. At this juncture, reference may be made to the decision of this court in the case of Amar Food Products v. Union of India, 2010 (259) ELT 490 (Guj.), wherein this court was considering a case where the Tribunal had directed 50% of the amount to be paid by way of pre-deposit failing which .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e in circumstances, inasmuch as, on the same issue of classification, the Tribunal had referred the matter on 23.11.2006 to the Larger Bench of the Tribunal not agreeing with the decision of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Favourite Food Products v. CCE. The Tribunal in the order impugned in the said petition had observed that since the pre-deposit has not been made, the appeal stood dismissed on 12.12.2006. Such order was subject matter of challenge before this court in the said petition. This .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of Favourite Food Products v. CCE (supra) to the Larger Bench. When, the Tribunal had itself directed the matter to be posted for reporting compliance on 20.12.2006, if as observed in the impugned order dated 11.1.2007, the appeal stood dismissed on 12.12.2006 for noncompliance of the directions issued vide order dated 12.10.2006, it is difficult to comprehend as to which matter was to be posted for reporting compliance on 20.12.2006. Thus, both things, viz. dismissal of the appeal ipso facto on .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s which at least would require the Tribunal to re-consider its earlier decision one way or the other, considering the fact that the Tribunal itself had not accepted the decision rendered in the case of Favourite Food Products v. CCE (supra) and had referred the same to the Larger Bench. In the circumstances, the Tribunal could not have dismissed the plea of the petitioner as regards change of circumstances on the ground that merely because a Division Bench has referred the said decision to the L .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

in circumstances and as such the impugned orders made by the Tribunal cannot be sustained. 12. Thus, the court in the above decision has held that the Tribunal could not have dismissed the plea of the petitioner as regards change of circumstances on the ground that merely because a Division Bench has referred the decision to the Larger Bench, the same would not constitute a change in circumstances so as to warrant modifying the interim order; more so, when it was the case of the petitioner that .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ver of pre-deposit of the amount involved needs to be allowed. In NSL Sugars v. CC, CE & ST, Guntur, the Tribunal by an order dated 5.2.2015 had waived pre-deposit of the liability of duty, interest and penalty and granted stay of all further proceedings in view of the order of reference to the Larger Bench. In Gupta Coal India Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai, the Appellate Tribunal, West Zonal Bench at Mumbai by an order dated 29.4.2015 found that the issue of eligibility of No .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

iew that when the matter is referred to the Larger Bench as a convention waiver of pre-deposit is granted. The Bench, accordingly, did not find any reason to deviate from such a view and allowed the application for waiver of pre-deposit and recovery thereof. Thus, from a conspectus of the above decisions of the Tribunal, it is evident that there is a convention that in case where an issue is referred to the Larger Bench as a matter of course, waiver of pre-deposit is granted. In the present case .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sit and pre-deposit having been waived in the case of a similarly situation assessee, the Tribunal without recording any reasons as to why the convention should not be followed and the order should not be modified, has simpliciter dismissed the application by a non-speaking order by stating that it did not find any merit in the application filed by the applicant. In the opinion of this court, merely because the petitioner had earlier filed a stay application wherein there was a direction to make .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ner, it would gain a march over other similarly situated assessees, who had made pre-deposit in terms of the order passed by the Tribunal. In the opinion of this court, merely because the petitioner is more vigilant about its right is no reason to non-suit the petitioner on the ground that other similarly situated assessees have not thought it fit to move applications for modification of the order of pre-deposit. When the petitioner has moved an application for modification before the Tribunal a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version