Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Commissioner Of Customs(Import), ... vs Mangali Petrochem Ltd on 19 June, 2014
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
WEST ZONAL BENCH AT MUMBAI
COURT NO.II
APPEAL NO.C/87017, 87949 to 87957/13-Mum
(Arising out of Order-in- Appeal No. 108(GR.1)/2013(JNCH)/IMP-99 & 243 to 251 (GR.I) /2013 (JNCH) /IMP 181 to 189 dtd. 13.2.2013 & 22.03.2013 resp. passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Nhave Sheva )
For approval and signature:
Honble Mr Ashok Jindal, Member(Judicial)
Honble Mr.P.K.Jain, Member(Technical)
============================================================
1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see : No
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 Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : seen
of the Order?
4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental : Yes
authorities?
============================================================= Commissioner of Customs(Import), Nhava Sheva :
Appellants VS Mangali Petrochem Ltd. I.G. International Pvt.Ltd.
Respondent Appearance Shri M.S. Reddy, Dy.Commissioner (A.R.) for Appellants None for Mangali Petrochem Ltd.
Shri Gaurav Gujrathi,advocate for I.G.International P.Ltd. Respondent CORAM:
Mr. Ashok Jindal, Member(Judicial) Mr.P.K.Jain, Member(Technical) Date of hearing: 19/06/2014 Date of decision 19/06/2014 ORDER NO.
Per : Ashok Jindal The Revenue is in appeals against the impugned orders wherein the ld.Commissioner(Appeals) has modified the assessment order for auditing under Section 17(6) of the Customs Act.
2. The brief facts f the case are that the respondent M/s. Mangali Petrochem Ltd. imported Bitumen 60/70 and M/s. I.G.International Pvt.Ltd. imported Fresh Apples. At the time of filing the Bills of Entry, the issue of valuation was raised and enhanced the declared value. The respondents paid excess customs duty at the time of clearance of goods but thereafter no speaking order under Sec.17(5) of the Customs Act was passed by the adjudicating authority for enhancing the value of the impugned goods. Aggrieved by the said order the respondents filed appeals before the ld.Commissioner(Appeals) who passed the following orders in respect of M/s. Mangali Petrochem Ltd.
I modify the order of assessment in the impugned Bill of Entry No.5346974 dated 30.11.2011 and order for auditing under Section 17(6) by the proper officer, as per procedure prescribed. The appeal No.F.No S/41-75/2012-MISC JNCH filed by the appellant is disposed of in the above terms. and in respect of M/s. I.G. International Pvt.Ltd. I modify the order of assessment in the impugned Bills of Entry stated in column(II0 of the table under para 1 above and order for auditing under Section 17(6) by the proper officer, as per procedure prescribed. The appeals No. F.No.S/49-845,846,847,1000/2012-MISC/JNCH&F.No.S/49-06,07,08,09,10/2013-MISC/JNCH filed by the appellant is disposed of on the above terms.
3. From the above said orders, Revenue is before us.
4. Heard the ld. A.R for the Revenue.
5. We find that in these cases, no speaking order has been passed by the adjudicating authority under Sec.17(5) of the Customs Act, 1962 giving reasons for enhancing the value. Therefore, the orders for auditing by the ld.Commissioner (Appeals) will be of no help. In these circumstances, we set aside the impugned orders and remand the matter back to the adjudicating authority to pass speaking orders under Sec.17(5) of the Customs Act, 1962 in accordance with law.
6. Appeals are disposed of by way of remand.
(Dictated in court) P.K.Jain Member(Technical) Ashok Jindal Member(Judicial) pv 3