PNB fraud due to failure of internal control, says RBI.:      Celeb jeweller Nirav Modi named in PNB’s $1.77-b fraud. Bank suspends 10 officers, lodges complaint with CBI; more banks may be hit. :      Bombay High Court in a hearing on 6th Feb, 2018 says GST regime is not user friendly. :      GST Network Chairman Ajay Bhushan return simplification panel to meet industry this week to simplify the return filing process.:    Finance Secretary Hasmukh Adhia said the Government stares at a Rs 50,000 crore GST revenue shortfall in the current fiscal. :    E-Way Bill which was to be rolled-out on 1st Feb is deferred to month-end due to technical glitches.:      TN raked in 22% more GST at Rs 23,318 crore between Jul-Dec 2017, against Rs 19,018 crore under VAT in the corresponding period the previous year. :      MoS,Corp Affairs PP Chaudhary says in Rajya Sabha that Govt has detected GST evasion of Rs 5.70 Crores in 16 cases during Jul-Nov 2017 - 6th Feb 2018. :      FM, Arun Jaitley says that States are not in favour of bringing the petroleum products under GST. :      The Finance Secretary, Hasmukh Adhia says out of 7 lakh tax payers who opted for composition scheme 5 lakhs had a turnover less than Rs 5 lakhs pa, though the exemption limit is upto Rs 20 lakhs. :     

CESTAT Chennai : Sterlite Industries (India) Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Customs, Chennai : 13th March, 2017

CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
SOUTH ZONAL BENCH
CHENNAI

Appeal No. C/87/2006
[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.C.Cus.No.1/2006 dt. 06.01.2006 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Chennai]

Sterlite Industries (India) Ltd.
Appellant

Versus

Commissioner of Customs, Chennai
Respondent

Appearance:
Shri S.Viswanathan, Advocate For the Appellant
Shri A. Cletus, ADC (AR) For the Respondent

CORAM :
Honble Shri D.N. Panda, Judicial Member
Honble Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Technical Member

Date of Hearing / decision :13.03.2017


FINAL ORDER No.40488/2017

Per D.N. Panda

Adjudication order dt. 28-04-2005 prima facie shows that there was no show cause notice issued for determination of the classification. Ld. Adjudicating Authority in para-4 of the order has recorded that classification declared by the appellant under CTH 902750 was not acceptable. The proper head for classification was CTH 90271000. He has also recorded that by letter dt. 15-04-2005 appellant informed that the duty was paid under protest.


2. In absence of SCN, appellant was deprived of the course of natural justice. It may be stated that violation of natural justice is not curable defect at the appellate stage. Therefore, the matter is remanded to the adjudicating authority to issue appropriate notice to appellant stating the reasons why Revenue seeks to classify the goods under CTH 90271000. Upon such notice, appellant shall file reply with 30 days of the service thereof. Considering the defence reply, the authority shall pass appropriate order, recording reason of his decision.


3. It may be stated that the very nature of goods being in dispute, it would be preferable to secure technical opinion of a National Institute to resolve the dispute at the interest of justice, confronting such opinion to appellant for defence.


4. In the result, Appeal is remanded to Adjudicating Authority.


(Dictated and pronounced in open court)


(Madhu Mohan Damodhar)             (D.N. Panda)
Technical Member                 Judicial Member


gs

Additional Info

  • Date Range: Monday, 13 March 2017
  • Court/Authority: CESTAT
  • Tax Type: Customs duty
  • Petitioner/Appellant: Sterlite Industries (India) Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Customs, Chennai
  • Respondent: Sterlite Industries (India) Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Customs, Chennai
  • Appl no. or Appl year: Appeal No. C/87/2006
  • Supreme Court Location: Delhi
  • CESTAT Location: Chennai
  • AAR Location: Delhi
  • Authority: Supreme Court

Seven questions to know if you 

are paying taxes 

correctly?

If you are the CFO or the Tax Head you ought to read this. Click Here

Our Main Services 

in Indirect Taxes

 

  • Business structuring and tax planning
  • Review of end-to-end business processes for indirect taxes
  • Strategy to prevent litigation, representation and litigation support
  • Tax compliance and tax control framework
  • Support on specific issues


 

Brief update on CESTAT judgements passed during June 2016 to July 2016. Please note this update is not a summary of the cases but only leads on important issues decided. The links to the judgments are also provided for the full text.

Click here for update

Go to top