2024 (11) TMI 1355

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....87283/2021 C/87284/2021 C/87285/2021 C/87286/2021 C/87287/2021 C/87288/2021 C/87289/2021 C/87290/2021 C/87291/2021 C/87292/2021 C/87293/2021 C/87294/2021 C/87295/2021 C/87296/2021 C/87297/2021 C/87298/2021 C/87299/2021 C/87300/2021 C/87301/2021 C/87302/2021 C/87303/2021 C/87304/2021 C/87305/2021 C/87306/2021 C/87307/2021 C/87308/2021 C/87309/2021 C/87310/2021 C/87311/2021 C/87312/2021 C/87313/2021 C/87314/2021 C/87315/2021 C/87316/2021 C/87317/2021 C/87318/2021 C/87319/2021 C/87320/2021 C/87321/2021 C/87322/2021 C/87323/2021 C/87324/2021 C/87325/2021 C/87326/2021 C/87327/2021 C/87328/2021 C/87329/2021 C/87330/2021 C/87331/2021 C/87332/2021 C/87333/2021 C/87334/2021 C/87335/2021 C/87336/2021 C/87337/2021 C/87338/2021 C/87339/2021 C/87340/202....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... appellant is before us disputing the finding on merit that their claim for assessment at rate of duty corresponding to tariff item 3822 0090 of First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act has been wrongly denied and that observance of the essence of assessment, in accordance with section 17(5) of the Customs Act for disputed classification to warrant issue of 'speaking order' in its breach was not considered at all. 2. It is common ground that the 'proper officer' had not issued order contemplated by section 17(5) of the Customs Act even as it was conceded, in the impugned order, that "2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant imported various types of "Diagnostic reagents" and classified the same under CTH 38220019 (with Basic Cus....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f their classification could not be displaced. It was further submitted that, in a parallel dispute over 'integrated tax' applicable to identical goods imported by them, the Tribunal, in Ortho Clinical Diagnostics India Pvt. Ltd vs. Commissioner of Customs (Import), Mumbai 2022 (9) TMI 1109 - CESTAT MUMBAI, had ruled in their favour. 4. Learned Counsel pointed out that a series of decisions of the Tribunal had placed emphasis on the inappropriateness of re-determination of assessment without taking such venture to the consummation legislated in section 17(5) of the Customs Act which, according to him, sufficed to set the revised classification to nought. He relied upon the orders in Shiv Ganesh Exim Pvt. Ltd vs. Commissioner of Customs, Jo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....iginal jurisdiction', so to speak, afforded by second proviso in section 128A of the Customs Act was not resorted to despite the patent breach of principles of natural justice by the original authority in placing the importer on notice of detriment being on record. 7. That the claim of the appellant herein for classification, with lower duty liability in consequence, had been preferred in the bill of entry is not in dispute; such are entered in the 'check list' which, upon discharge of duty liability, is transformed as assessed bill of entry for clearance from customs control under section 47 of the Customs Act. The revision occurred between filing of bill of entry and the conclusion of mandate under section 17 of the Customs Act and, all ....