Telangana High Court
M/S.Arani Argo Oil Industries Limited vs Commissioner Of Customs, ... on 28 August, 2018
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN
AND
THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI
CEA.NO.154 OF 2018
JUDGMENT:{Per the Hon'ble Sri Justice Ramesh Ranganathan} This appeal, under Section 130 of the Customs Act, is preferred against the order passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, South Zonal Bench, Bangalore in appeal No.C/59/2009 dated 31.08.2015 whereby the appeal preferred by the revenue was allowed. The appeal filed before the Tribunal was against the order passed by the Commissioner of Customs, Visakhapatnam. Following its earlier decision in Arani Agro Oil Industries Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Visakhapatnam1, the Tribunal held that, even though the acid value was less than six and within range, the Carotenoid value was less than the prescribed limit of 500 - 2500 mg per kg; and, therefore, the imported crude palm oil was not entitled to the benefit of the notification. The Tribunal observed that its earlier order had been confirmed by the Supreme Court.
In Arani Agro Oil Industries Ltd.1, the assessee had contended that, once the port health officer has given a certificate that the imported palmolein after refining conforms to the standards of PFA and the Rules, the report of the Chemical Examiner need not be considered. The Tribunal held that notification No.21/02 clearly required two conditions to be fulfilled for being eligible for exemption; the first condition was that the acid value should be 2% or more; the second condition was that 1 2010(256) Excise Law Times 627 2 the total carotenoid (as betacarotene) should be in the range of 500-2500 mg per kg in loose or bulk form; the question involved was not a dispute or conflict between the Chemical Examiner's analysis and the PHO analysis; it was whether the imported goods complied with the conditions laid down in the notification; the Chemical Examiner's report showed that the acid value conformed to the specification of acid value as given in notification No.120/2003 i.e. more than 2%; the second condition stipulated in the said notification regarding the carotenoid content (as betacarotene), was not satisfied as the Chemical Examiner had reported the total carotenoid value as ranging between 408 and 449 mg per kg; and this particular value did not satisfy the conditions laid down in the notification. The Tribunal rejected the contention of the assessee that the carotenoid value would go down or would get deteriorated, and held that the goods had entered Kakinada port on 07.11.2003, the samples drawn by the authorities were tested on 27.11.2003, and the appellants did not ask for a retest of the sample by challenging the sampling procedure. The appeal preferred against the aforesaid order of the Tribunal, in Civil Appeal No.16245 of 2010, was dismissed by the Supreme Court on 19.07.2010.
The notification, at entry-34, relates to "Crude palm oil and its fractions, of edible grade, having an acid value or more and total carotenoid (as betacarotene) in the range of 500-2500 mg per kg in loose or bulk form". It is only if the total carotenoid value falls within the range of 500-2500 mg per kg, is the assessee entitled for exemption. In the present case, the carotenoid value is less than 500, and is below the minimum limit prescribed under the exemption notification. The 3 Tribunal was, therefore, justified in holding against the assessee, and in following its earlier order in Arani Agro Oil Industries Ltd.1 which was affirmed by the Supreme Court in Civil Apepal No.16245 of 2010 dated 19.07.2010.
An appeal, under Section 130 of the Customs Act, lies only if the High Court is satisfied that the case involves a substantial question of law. While a feeble attempt is made, by the learned counsel for the appellant, to submit that the carotenoid value would deplete over a period of time, this Court would not be justified in examining these disputed questions of fact, for it is only if a substantial question of law arises for consideration, can an appeal be entertained under Section 130 of the Customs Act. We see no reason, therefore, to interfere with the order passed by the Tribunal.
The appeal fails and is, accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand dismissed.
_______________________________ (RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J) __________________________________ (KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI, J) 28th August 2018 RRB