2013 (12) TMI 290 - AT - Customs

Tribunal Upholds Central PSU's Duty Refund, Based on ECIL Judgment

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal challenging the refund of duty paid by a Central PSU on imported machinery. The decision was based on the ECIL ... Maintainability of appeals where the Committee on Disputes had declined permission prior to ECIL - effect of the Constitution Bench decision in Electronics Corporation of India Ltd. (ECIL) recalling earlier directions - requirement of COD clearance for pursuing appeals in matters involving Central Public Sector Undertakings - application of Board circular dated 24-3-2011 directing field formations to pursue appeals involving Central PSUs without COD permissionMaintainability of appeals where the Committee on Disputes had declined permission prior to ECIL - requirement of COD clearance for pursuing appeals in matters involving Central Public Sector Undertakings - Appeal by the Department is not maintainable where the Committee on Disputes had declined permission prior to the Constitution Bench decision in ECIL, and therefore the appeal must be dismissed. - HELD THAT: - The Tribunal examined the effect of the Constitution Bench judgment in Electronics Corporation of India Ltd. (ECIL) and the Board's subsequent circular of 24-3-2011. It observed that prior to the ECIL decision (17-2-2011) parties were required to obtain clearance from the Committee on Disputes (COD) to pursue appeals involving Central PSUs. Where the COD had already declined permission before the ECIL pronouncement, neither party could pursue the appeal notwithstanding the later Board instruction that COD permission was not required going forward. Applying this principle to the present appeal concerning imports in 1988-89, the Tribunal found that COD had declined permission earlier and, therefore, the Revenue's appeal filed thereafter could not be maintained. [Paras 5, 6]Appeal dismissed; consequential relief to the respondents.Final Conclusion: The Revenue's appeal is dismissed because the Committee on Disputes had declined permission prior to the Constitution Bench judgment in ECIL, and consequently the appeal could not be pursued despite subsequent Board instructions that COD clearance was not required. Issues:- Appeal filed by Revenue seeking to vacate order allowing refund of duty- Committee on Disputes declining permission for Department to pursue appeal- Instructions issued by C.B.E. & C. regarding appeals involving Central PSUs- Compliance with Board's instructions by field officers- Applicability of judgments recalled by ECIL case on appeals involving Central PSUs- Dismissal of appeal by Department with consequential relief to respondentsAnalysis:The judgment pertains to an appeal filed by the Revenue challenging an order allowing a refund of duty paid by a Central PSU on imports of machinery. The respondents, M/s. Kudremukh Iron Ore Ltd., had paid Rs. 16.53 lakhs in duty on 12 consignments of machinery during the year 1988-89. The Commissioner (Appeals) had granted the refund, prompting the Revenue to appeal the decision.During the proceedings, the learned Consultant representing the respondents referred to the minutes of the Committee on Disputes meeting dated 13-5-2008, where permission to pursue the appeal had been declined. Additionally, a letter dated 24th March, 2011 from C.B.E. & C. was presented, containing instructions related to a judgment by the Supreme Court in the case of Electronics Corporation of India Ltd. v. Union of India and Others. The judgment had implications on appeals involving Central PSUs, specifically regarding the requirement of clearance from the Committee on Disputes.The judgment highlighted that prior to 17-2-2011, appeals involving Central PSUs where the Committee on Disputes had declined permission required clearance from the Committee. However, post the ECIL judgment, such appellants were no longer bound by this requirement. The Board's instructions were being followed by field officers, as confirmed by the learned JCDR during the proceedings.Ultimately, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal filed by the Department, citing the applicability of the ECIL judgment and the Circular issued by the C.B.E. & C. The dismissal of the appeal came with consequential relief to the respondents, upholding the decision to allow the refund of duty paid by M/s. Kudremukh Iron Ore Ltd. on the imported machinery consignments.