1997(03)LCX0149

IN THE CEGAT, COURT NO. II, NEW DELHI

S/Shri G.A. Brahma Deva, Member (J) and J.H. Joglekar, Member (T)

TAJ MAHAL HOTEL

Versus

COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, BOMBAY

Final Order No. C/761/97-B2, dated 21-3-1997 in Appeal No. C/147/87-B2

Advocated By :  Shri K. Kumar, Advocate, for the Appellant.

Shri K. Srivastava, SDR, for the Respondent.

[Order per : G.A. Brahma Deva, Member (J)]. - The short point to be considered in this appeal is whether item Fuel Injector imported by the appellants is classifiable under 84.06 as claimed by the party or under 84.10 as per the department.

2. Heard Shri K. Kumar, ld. Advocate for the appellants and the department was represented by Shri K. Srivastava, ld. DR.

3. Originally the assessment of Fuel Injector was made under 84.10. Shri K. Kumar submitted that in view of the internal audit objection, refund claim was filed by the party for re-assessment of the Fuel Injector under 84.06. He drew our attention to the refund claim at page 3 of the paper book in which it was specifically mentioned that refund of customs duty on Injectors paid. He submitted that though the specific claim of the party was with reference to the Fuel Injector, the issue with reference to Fuel Injector has not been dealt with by the authorities below in their respective orders but they have gone into the aspect of deciding the issue of classification in respect of Fuel Pump. He said that issue of classification with reference to Fuel Pump is not in dispute and he is not pressing that item even now. In other words, he is accepting the classification of Fuel Pumps under 84.10 as it was held by the department.

4. Heard Shri K. Srinivasan. Shri Srinivasan also submitted that it is correct that the orders passed by the authorities below have not dealt with reference to the item Fuel Injector but decided the issue with reference to Fuel Pump.

5. We have carefully considered the submissions and perused the records. Though the specific claim was with reference to the item Fuel Injector imported by the appellants as can be seen from the refund claim, it is difficult to understand why the authorities below have not decided the issue with reference to Fuel Injector but has proceeded to reject the refund claim in respect of the item Fuel Pump. Since the authorities below have not applied their mind with reference to re-classification of Fuel Injector as claimed by the party, we are of the view that the matter will have to go back for re-consideration. Accordingly we are remanding this matter to the concerned Asstt. Commissioner to examine the issue with reference to Fuel Injector only and to pass an appropriate order in accordance with law after providing an opportunity to the appellants. Thus, this appeal is allowed by way of remand. Since this is an old matter as it was pointed out by the ld. counsel, the Asstt. Commissioner is directed to dispose of the matter as expeditiously as possible preferably within three months from the date of receipt of the order.

_______

Equivalent 1998 (102) ELT 738 (Tribunal)