Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S. High Energy Batteries (I) Ltd vs Cc, Chennai on 28 June, 2010
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX
APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
SOUTH ZONAL BENCH AT CHENNAI
C/570/2009
(Arising out of Order in Appeal C.CUS No. 1358,1359/2009 dated 06.11.2009, passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Chennai).
For approval and signature
Honble Ms. JYOTI BALASUNDARAM, Vice President
_________________________________________________________
1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see the :
order for Publication as per Rule 27 of the
CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?
2. Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the :
CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication
in any authoritative report or not?
3. Whether the Honble Member wishes to see the fair :
copy of the Order.
4. Whether order is to be circulated to the :
Departmental Authorities? _________________________________________________________
M/s. High Energy Batteries (I) Ltd. : Appellants
Vs.
CC, Chennai : Respondents
Appearance Shri M.N. Bharathi, Adv., for the appellant Shri T.H. Rao, SDR, for the respondent CORAM Honble Ms. JYOTI BALASUNDARAM, Vice President Date of hearing: 28.06.2010 Date of decision: 28.06.2010 Final ORDER No._______________ Per: Jyoti Balasundaram The assessees herein imported Silver Chloride Sheets and the Bills of Entry were assessed on merits for levy of 10% basic customs duty. They claimed benefit of concessional rate of duty in terms of Notification No. 21/2002-Cus dated 1.3.2002 at Sl. No. 552 of the table thereto. In appeals before the Commissioner (A), which were rejected on the ground that the claim for the benefit under the said notification was not raised before the adjudicating authority and therefore, the assessees cannot be said to have a grievance against the assessment order. Hence this appeal.
2. I have heard both sides. The Commissioner (A) has clearly erred in holding that the assessees cannot be said to be aggrieved by the assessment. The plea for coverage under the notification can be raised by the assessees before the lower appellate authority who should have examined the merits of the claim or remanded the case to the adjudicating authority for such examination. I, therefore, set aside the impugned order and remand the case to the adjudicating authority to examine as to whether the assessees are entitled to the benefit of notification No. 21/02-Cus dated 1.3.02 and pass fresh orders after extending reasonable opportunity to them of being heard in their defence. The appeal is thus allowed by way of remand.
(Order pronounced and dictated in the open Court) (JYOTI BALASUNDARAM) VICE PRESIDENT BB 3