TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (10) TMI 892
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....thereof are classifiable under 8708 9900 - "other parts and accessories for motor vehicles". Hence the goods were sought to be re-classified under Tariff heading 8708 9900 which carries a higher rate of duty than what was declared. Hence the wrong classification of goods resulted in short-levy of customs duty of Rs.71,08,910/-. Hence a demand notice was issued to recover the short-duty along with applicable interest. After due process of law, the Ld. Adjudicating Authority held that the goods are not capable of use without further work in a motor vehicle and the classification of the goods has to be determined keeping in mind how they are referred in common parlance. Hence, he observed that the goods cannot be considered as parts or accessories and held that the goods are rightly classifiable under 7326 1910 as declared by the respondent and dropped the differential duty demand. The department preferred an appeal before the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals). Vide the order impugned, the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the order of the adjudicating authority. Hence the present appeal by the department. 3. Ld. Authorized Representative Shri Anoop Singh appeared for the appellant-depart....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he OIO, which is contrary to the time limit set out in section 129D(3) of the Customs Act 1962. There is no provision to condone this period under the Customs Act 1962. Therefore the impugned appeal is liable to be dismissed on this ground. The said ground was raised before the First Appellate Authority, however the Ld. Commissioner Appeals has decided the matter in their favour on merits without examining the issue of limitation. On merits the Ld. Counsel stated that as per Rule 1 of the schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 the classification of the product has to be determined according the terms of the Heading and any relevant Section or Chapter Note. He referred to the Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment in CCE Vs Simplex Mills Co. Ltd. [2005 (181) ELT 345 (SC)]. He further stated that sub-heading 7326 1910 covers Other Articles of Iron and Steel, Forged or Stamped, but not further worked, for automobiles and earth moving equipment. The heading squarely covers the imported goods and hence merit being classified under the said heading as per Rule 1 itself. The Ld. Counsel stated that revenue had referred to the HSN to state that parts of bodies i.e. sides of automobiles are cla....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ribunal committed an illegality in deciding the question on merits. Hence is the finding of Tribunal on merits liable to be set aside.?" The appeal is admitted on the following question of law and is by consent taken up for final hearing. The Tribunal came to the conclusion that the demand by the Revenue was beyond the period of limitation of one year prescribed under Section 73(1) of the Finance Act, 1994 and that the period of five years could not have been invoked. That part of the judgment of the Tribunal has been confirmed in the companion appeal. Once that be the position and the Tribunal having came to the conclusion that the extended period of limitation could not have been validly applied, the Tribunal, in our view, acted outside its jurisdiction in entering upon the merits of the dispute on whether the demand for duty should be confirmed. Once it is held that the demand is time barred, there would be no occasion for the Tribunal to enquire into the merits of the issues raised by the Revenue. In State Bank of India Vs. B.S. Agricultural Industries (I) [AIR 2009 SUPREME COURT 2210], the Supreme Court dealt with a situation where the consumer forum....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t it cannot be termed to be an order passed under the Act." (emphasis added) 7. We find that the proper function of an appellate court is to correct an error in the judgment or proceedings of the court below. The Apex Court while dealing with the role of appellate courts in RAMAKANT AMBALAL CHOKSI Vs HARISH AMBALAL CHOKSI & OTHERS [2024 INSC 913 / CIVIL APPEAL NO. 13001 OF 2024, Dated: 22.11.2024], examined the hierarchical functioning of the trial court and the appellate court in a criminal trial and held: "30. This Court in Shyam Sel & Power Ltd. Vs Shyam Steel Industries Ltd. reported in (2023) 1 SCC 634 observed that the hierarchy of the trial court and the appellate court exists so that the trial court exercises its discretion upon the settled principles of law. An appellate court, after the findings of the trial court are recorded, has an advantage of appreciating the view taken by the trial judge and examining the correctness or otherwise thereof within the limited area available. It further observed that if the appellate court itself decides the matters required to be decided by the trial court, there would be no necessity to have the hierarchy of courts. ....