9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (8) TMI 96X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y Report; (c)(i) For quashing the Public Notice No. 3/94, dated 10-3-1994. (ii) For quashing the order dated 3-6-1999 [Annexure-L] passed by the second respondent. 2.The petitioner imports crude oil of different varieties. For the purpose of assessment of customs duty, the petitioner filed Bills of Entry on the basis of the quantity measured at shore tank (the quantity that is received in the shore tank on the landmass, after discharge from the ship). The Customs Authorities have assessed the quantity on the basis of the Ullage Survey Report prepared at the port of destination, when the ship enters the territorial waters before discharge of cargo on the landmass, and issued show cause notices in regard to 10 items of cargo, calling upon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for petitioners, on the other hand, submitted that the Appellate Authority will be bound by the decision of the Tribunal in Cochin Refineries Ltd v. Commissioner of Customs, Cochin [1999 (105) E.L.T. 108], wherein the CEGA Tribunal, South Zonal Bench, has decided the question which is the subject matter of the dispute, by holding that importation of goods is complete as soon as vessel carrying the cargo enters the territorial waters of India and does not postpone till goods are actually off-loaded on the landmass of India and therefore duty liability arises on the basis of the Ullage Suryey Report prepared at the port of discharge. He, therefore, contended that the Appellate Authority, being bound by the said decision will decide the matte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Bench of Hon'ble Bombay High Court discussed above as overriding the other decisions of Division Benches of other High Courts as well as that of the Tribunal." 8.Thus, the Tribunal's view in Cochin Refineries's case is not on the basis of any independent reasoning, but solely based on the basis that the decision of Bombay High Court in Apar Private Ltd.'s case which is of a Full Bench, whereas the contrary view of the Gujarat and Madras High Courts were either of a single Judge or Division Bench. The decision in Apar Private Ltd.'s case had been taken up in appeal before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has allowed the appeal [Union of India and Ors. v. Apar Private Ltd. and Others, reported in 1999 (112) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.) = 1999 (6) Su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rivate Ltd. and Others [1999 (112) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.) = 1999 (6) Supreme 348] related to the rate of duty. He therefore contended that the decision in Cochin Refineries will still be binding on the Appellate Authority. This contention is without merit. As noticed above, the Tribunal felt itself bound by the decision in Apar, because it was a decision of the Full Bench, as contrasted from the decisions of Madras and Gujarat High Courts which were of smaller Benches. Once Apar has been overruled, the binding nature of Cochin Refineries which is based on Apar disappears. 10.In view of the above, observing liberty to the petitioners to have recourse to the remedy of appeal, this petition is disposed of. 11.Having regard to the fact that the peti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
