TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 571X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2. The judgment, therefore, applies to the present case as well. Appeal is dismissed only on the ground that it is not maintainable. - CUSAP No.6 of 2017 (O&M) - - - Dated:- 22-2-2018 - MR. S. J. VAZIFDAR, CJ. AND MR. AVNEESH JHINGAN, J. For The Appellant : Mr. Sourabh Goel, Sr. Standing Counsel, UOI For The Respondent : Mr. Jagmohan Bansal, Advocate ORDER S.J. VAZIFDAR, CHIEF JUSTICE (Oral): This is an appeal against the orders of the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 12.07.2016 and 18.04.2017. 2. By the order dated 12.07.2016, the Tribunal, inter-alia , in express terms, decided the valuation of the imported goods. The dispute between the parties is whether the goods that were ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3. The parties shall in the first instance appear before the Tribunal on 13.02.2017 and thereafter as directed by the Tribunal. We express no views or opinion in respect of the order dated 22.02.2016 in so far as it relates to valuation and classification. 4. The appeal is accordingly disposed of. 4. We have set out the order only because it was relied upon by the parties. It does not determine any question of law as the order itself states that it was passed with the consent of the parties. Upon remand, the other impugned order dated 18.04.2017 was passed. The order directed the revenue to release the goods immediately to the appellant. The order, inter-alia , took into consideration the first impugned order, namely, the o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bstantial question of law. 7. The Division Bench held that so long as the question of valuation or classification arises the appeal would not be maintainable before the High Court even if other issues are raised in view of section 35G(1) of the Central Excise Act. The Division Bench held:- 11. The words among other things in Section 35 G are of singular importance in determining the ambit of Section 35 G. These words indicate that an appeal is maintainable under Section 35 G to the High Court only if the order passed in appeal by the Tribunal is not one relating to the determination of any question having a relation to the rate of duty of excise or to the value of goods for the purposes of assessment, an appeal against that o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nacted. It was to avoid the bifurcation of proceedings before the Supreme Court and the High Court. 13. This would also avoid conflicting findings. A view to the contrary would lead to the possibility of an appeal against the order of the Tribunal being maintainable in certain respects before the High Court and in other respects before the Supreme Court. This could lead to considerable confusion and complication. For instance, it may well be necessary in a given case for the Supreme Court to refer to, analyse and adjudicate upon the facts in relation to an order relating to the determination of any question having a relation to the rate of duty of excise or to the value of goods for the purposes of assessment. It may equally be necess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion 35 L the mere fact that the party chooses to challenge only that part of the order that falls within the ambit of Section 32 G would make no difference. In other words, it cannot be said that the party that chooses to challenge the order of the Tribunal only so far as it relates to the determination of questions falling within the ambit of 35 G must file the appeal before the High Court even though the order also deals with questions that fall within the ambit of Section 32 L. In that event, if the other party files an appeal against the order of the Tribunal on issues that fall within the ambit of Section 32 L in the Supreme Court, the very purpose of Section 32 G of bringing the appeals either before the Supreme Court or before the H ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
