9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (2) TMI 1145X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... writ, Order or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, and thereby direct to waive detention and demurrage charges." 4. The Petitioner is a company engaged in providing Aviation and Expressway Services. The Petitioner is also engaged in supply of goods such as Runway Friction Testing Machine. The Petitioner's sister concern, M/s. Sai Aviotechniques, has been awarded Work Orders by Airport Authority of India, Mumbai International Airport Limited and Kampegouda International Airport, Bengaluru for provision of service of Friction Testing of Runways of the aforesaid Airports. The Friction Testing Machine is essential to test the Friction of the Runway in order to avoid accidents to airplanes on account of the slippery runway specifically during the monsoon season. 5. The Petitioner placed an Order for supply of one used Friction Testing Machine Fitted in CAR SAAB 9-5 to M/s. Scandinavian Airfield Systems, Sweden, to cater to the need of its sister concern. Accordingly, the said supplier consigned the machinery under cover of Invoice No. 332 dated 17th December 2021 and Sea Waybill dated 23rd January 2022 for FOB value of 20,300.00 Euros. 6. The Petitioner filed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which was attended by the Petitioner through its Authorised Representative. During the course of hearing, the Petitioner submitted that the imported machinery merits classification under Chapter 90318000 and not under Chapter 8705 and, thereby, the import policy conditions as well as the provisions of the Central Motor Vehicle Act and Rules made thereunder were not applicable to the imported machinery. The Petitioner requested the Original Adjudicating Authority to classify the goods under Chapter 90 as Runway Friction Measuring Machine and thereby allow clearance of goods for home consumption. Despite the said submissions of the Petitioner, the Original Adjudicating Authority, by an Order in Original dated 20th June 2022, classified the imported machinery under Chapter 87059000. The Original Adjudicating Authority held that the imported machinery was a motor vehicle, and since old motor vehicles beyond the period of three years were prohibited, did not allow clearance, and ordered that the said machinery be re-exported after paying a redemption fine under Section 125 of the Customs Act 1962, and imposed a penalty of Rs. 2,00,000/-. 12. Being aggrieved by the said Order-in-Origin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng the said Order, unless its operation has been stayed. This is not the case in the present matter. In support of this submission, the Petitioner has relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in Union of India vs. Kamlakshi Finance Cororation Ltd. 1991 (55) E.L.T. 433 (S.C.) and the judgments of this Court in Ganesh Benzoplast Ltd. vs. Union of India 2020 (374) E.L.T. 552 (Bom) and Himgiri Buildcon & Industries Ltd. vs. Union of India 2021 (376) E.L.T. 257 (Bom.). 18. In our view, it is settled law that the principle of judicial discipline requires that the orders of the higher appellate authorities should be followed unreservedly by the subordinate authorities. The mere fact, that the order of an appellate authority is the subject matter a further appeal, can furnish no ground for the department for not following it, unless its operation has been stayed by the higher appellate authority or by a competent Court. If this healthy rule is not followed, the result will only be undue harassment to the assessee and chaos in the administration of tax laws. 19. The aforesaid well settled position is very clear from the decision of the Supreme Court in Kamlakshi Finance Corpor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... emand as directed by the Commissioner (Appeals), not to speak of within the stipulated period of six weeks but even till date though fresh testing of goods has been carried out which incidentally has turned out in favour of the petitioner. What is striking to note is that the original authority who is a subordinate authority in comparison to the appellate authority i.e., Commissioner (Appeals) has chosen not to comply with the direction of the higher appellate authority exercising quasi-judicial powers. This is disturbing to say the least as it strikes at the very root of administrative discipline and may have the effect of severely undermining the efficacy of the appellate remedy provided to a litigant under the statute. 33. In Union of India Vs. Kamlakshi Finance Corporation Limited, 1992 (38) ECR 486 = 1991 (55) E.L.T. 433 (S.C.), Supreme Court held in clear terms that the mere fact that the order of the appellate authority is the subject matter of an appeal can furnish no ground for not following it unless its operation has been suspended by a competent court. In that case arising out of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 the adjudicating authority did not comply with the o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iate direction from the Tribunal or the Supreme Court, as the case may be. Without obtaining such an Order they cannot refuse to implement the Order under appeal. 18. In a somewhat identical matter, a Division Bench of this Court in Ganesh Benzoplast Limited Vs. Union of India, 2020 (374) ELT 552 referred to the decision of the Supreme Court in Kamlakshi Finance Corporation Limited (supra) and held that non-compliance to Orders of the appellate authority by the subordinate original authority is disturbing to say the least as it strikes at the very root of administrative discipline and may have the effect of severely undermining the efficacy of the appellate remedy provided to a litigant under the statute. Principles of judicial discipline require that the Orders of the higher appellate authorities should be followed unreservedly by the subordinate authorities. In the facts and circumstances of that case, Respondents were directed to release the goods forthwith and without any delay." 22. Applying this settled legal position to the facts of the present case, by the said Order dated 23rd March 2023, the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) has set aside the confiscation of the impo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
