Legal principle

Till a CESTAT decision is reversed in the manner known to law, assessing officers are bound by it and cannot take a contrary view (Union of India v. Kamlakshi Finance Corporation Ltd., 1991 (55) ELT 433 (S.C.)).

Court decision

The Madras High Court allowed all the writ petitions and quashed the six impugned Orders-in-Original with no costs, holding that they suffered from lack of jurisdiction because the respondent was bound by the CESTAT finding that Wheat Flour and Wheat Gluten fall under the same classification, and could not take a different view; the Department remains free to appeal the CESTAT decision on the substantial question of law if aggrieved, but until it is reversed the assessing officers remain bound by it.

Facts

M/s.Parry Enterprises India Ltd., an importer-trader of Wheat Gluten, cleared six Bills of Entry duty-free by claiming exemption under notification dated 11.09.2009 read with a Duty Free Import Authorisation (DFIA) dated 14.08.2012 issued for the policy period 2009-2014, acting through its licensed customs broker M/s.Fame Shipping Agency. The Additional Commissioner of Customs, Chennai II initiated an inquiry on the premise that Wheat Gluten could not be imported against a DFIA issued for export of biscuits, issued six show cause notices proposing rejection of exemption, confiscation, demand of duty and cess, interest and penalty, and passed six Orders-in-Originial (No.11/2023 dated 28.02.2023 and Nos.09, 10, 12, 13 and 14/2023 dated 10.03.2023). The petitioner's written submissions relying on the Tribunal (Ahmedabad) decision in Uni Colloids Impex Pvt Ltd (2014 (310) ELT 583) were allegedly ignored.

Key provisions

• Section 131BA, Customs Act, 1962 — Appeal not to be filed in certain cases