TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 1327X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oner : Mr. D. K. Sinha, A. C. (AR) For the Respondent : Amey Nargolkar, Advocate ORDER Per : Ramesh Nair The Appeal is directed against Order-in-Appeal No. 286/2003 -APTE (Airport) dated 24.09.2003 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Airport, Mumbai, wherein the Ld. Commissioner allowed the appeal of the appellant by setting aside the Order-in-Original. 2. The issue involved in the present case is that whether the appellant is entitle for the benefit of Notification No. 80/70-Cus dated 24.08.1970. The revenue has contended that the goods imported are computer parts by the appellant s company M/s Tata Infotech Ltd. whereas the Notification is applicable to the goods imported as private personal property o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rder of the Bombay High Court in the case of Birla Erickson (supra) benefit of Notification No. 80/70 dated 29.08.1970 could not be extended to import to warranty replacement by companies or commercial organization. 5. On the other hand, Shri Amey Nargolkar, Ld. Counsel for the respondent submits that the judgment in the case of Echjay Industries Pvt. Ltd. (supra), the Hon ble High Court has passed very detailed order, discussing entire facts of the case and by passing a reasoned order, decided that the benefit of notification is eligible even to the commercial organization also. However, the judgment passed by Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of Birla Erickson (supra), the Hon ble Bombay High Court has not seen the light of judgmen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dgment on the same legal issue and the said judgment is contrary to the first, he subsequent judgment shall be a per in-curium judgment and the same is not finding on the lower court. In such a situation, the subordinate courts are free to follow the earlier judgment if it feels applicable in the facts and circumstances of the case in hand. 7. Since in the second order of the Honble High Court in Birla Erickson case, the judgment of Echjay Industries was not considered, e the Birla Erickson judgment is per in-curium. Therefore, the Birla Erickson judgment is not binding. The Ld. Counsel s reliance on the judgment of Siddharam Sallingppa Vs. State of Maharashtra Others of Hon ble Supreme Court MANU/SC/1021/2010 A.I.R. 2011 SC 312 suppo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
