2026-VIL-597-CESTAT-MUM-CU

CUSTOMS CESTAT Cases

Customs - Eligibility for Concessional Rate of Duty on import of "Cisco Catalyst 3850 Series Ethernet Switches" – Appellant claimed the benefit of concessional rate of Basic Customs Duty (BCD) at 10% under Notification No. 57/2017-Cus. dated 30.06.2017 - Department denied this benefit, holding that the basic rate of duty at 20% should be applicable - Whether the imported goods are eligible for the benefit of concessional rate of BCD under the said Notification – HELD - The issue regarding entitlement to the concessional rate of duty on the identical goods was earlier decided in favor of the appellant by the Tribunal as well as the High Court - Since the issue arising out of the present dispute, with regard to availment of the benefit of concessional rate of duty on the subject goods is no more open for any debate, the impugned order, denying the benefits of concessional rate of duty to the appellants cannot stand for judicial scrutiny. Therefore, the appeals filed by the appellants are allowed by setting aside the impugned order pertaining to assessed B/E against which the order was passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) - Maintainability of appeal before the Tribunal in absence of appealable order under Section 128A of the Customs Act - Payment of duty under protest - The Commissioner (Appeals) passed the impugned order in disposing of 3 assessed Bills of Entry (B/Es). However, the appellant filed 41 appeals before the Tribunal - Maintainability of appeal – HELD - The Customs Act provides for filing of appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) against any 'decision' or 'order' passed by the officer of Customs lower in rank than a Principal Commissioner or Commissioner of Customs – The payment of duty amount under protest cannot be treated as a ‘decision’ taken or ‘order’ passed by the competent authority under the statute. In the present case, the appellant failed to prove that they had filed appeals before the Commissioner (Appeals) against the remaining 38 assessed B/Es. Further, the impugned order did not consider any such appeals. Therefore, the remaining 38 appeals filed by the appellant are not maintainable as no orders were passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) under Section 128A of the Customs Act in respect of those 38 assessed B/Es - the impugned order passed in respect of three (3) appeals being Nos. C/87546/ 2022, C/87558/2022 and C/87568/2022 is set aside and the appeals are allowed in favour of the appellants. The remaining 38 appeals filed by the appellant are dismissed as not maintainable.

Quick Search

/

Create Account



Log In



Forgot Password


Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page



Feedback this page