Page 15 - ELT_2nd_15th April 2020_Vol 372_Part

2020 ] INDEX - 15th April, 2020 xiii
proceedings by following law, rules, regulations and Government policy
as well as judicial precedents as applicable to facts of case -
Notwithstanding, if any daily orders are passed, a copy of same be
supplied to petitioner if sought - Section 122A of Customs Act, 1962 -
Article 226 of Constitution of India — Narendra Kumar Jain v. Dinesh Meena, Joint
Commr., Cus. (Preventive) (Del.) ............................. 247
Anti-dumping duty - Injection moulding machine imported from China -
Used for moulding of Synthetic Polymer viz. PVC, TPR and EVA to
generate sole for footwear and not for making or repairing footwear or
other articles of hides, skins or leather - Machine classifiable under Tariff
Item 8477 10 00 of Customs Tariff Act, 1975 and not under Heading 8453
ibid - Machine not exclusively used for making footwear and footwear
sole/strap/heel - Contention that Heading 8453 ibid refers
independently to ‘Machinery for making or repairing footwear’ not
sustainable - That expression to be understood in context of heading
dealing with ‘Machinery for preparing, tanning or working hides, skins
or leather’ - Contention that benefit given to importer on the basis of
clamping force being less than 40 tons in other case of no avail as not said
question of fact specifically not pleaded before concerned authorities -
Anti-dumping duty in terms of Notification No. 39/2010-Cus. to be
levied - Order of Appellate Tribunal affirmed — Jama Corporation Pvt. Ltd. v.
Commissioner of Customs (Imports) (S.C.) ......................... 193
Appeal lies to Supreme Court on issue of taxability/excisability of goods -
See under APPEAL TO HIGH COURT ...................... 220
Appeal to Appellate Tribunal - Appealable order - Communication of
Deputy Commissioner of Customs to effect that Commissioner of
Customs had allowed provisional release of goods subject to payment of
admitted duty liability plus differential duty and execution of bank
guarantee - Final determination of duty liability yet to be done - Appeal
as against such communication pre-mature and cannot be entertained by
Tribunal at this juncture - Sections 18 and 129A of Customs Act, 1962 —
Sharaya International v. Commissioner of Customs, Nhava Sheva-V (Tri. - Mumbai) ...... 297
Appeal to High Court - Maintainability - On question of taxability or
excisability of goods arising from orders of Tribunal - Appeal lies to
Supreme Court - Contention that appeal to Supreme Court from
Tribunal’s orders in respect of excisability/taxability was new
class/category of orders and therefore, amendment of Section 35L of
Central Excise Act, 1944 was to be prospective, not acceptable -
Consistent view of Courts that appeals in respect of
excisability/taxability appealable to Supreme Court even before insertion
of sub-section (2) to Section 35L ibid - No new category or class made for
first time by virtue of amendment - No right of appeal to High Court
taken away by virtue of amendment - Appeals from orders of Tribunal
relating to taxability or excisability passed prior to 6th August, 2014 i.e.
date of insertion of sub-section (2) to Section 35L ibid being a rate of duty
issue appealable only to Supreme Court and not High Court -
Amendment made to Section 35L ibid only clarificatory and retrospective
in nature - Sections 35G and 35L of Central Excise Act, 1944 —
Commissioner Central Excise, Mumbai-V v. Reliance Media Works Ltd. (Bom.) ......... 220
Appealable order - Communication of DC informing conditions of
provisional release ordered by Commissioner, not an appealable order -
See under APPEAL TO APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ................ 297
EXCISE LAW TIMES  15th April 2020  31