Page 179 - ELT_2nd_15th April 2020_Vol 372_Part

2020 ] COMMISSIONER CENTRAL EXCISE, MUMBAI-V v. RELIANCE MEDIA WORKS LTD. 225

ity/excisability would be before this Court, made the following
submissions :-
(a) Prior to insertion of Section 35L(2) of the Act, appeals to this
Court were governed by Sections 35G(1) and 35L(1)(b) of the
Act. In terms of Sections 35G(1) and 35L(1)(b) of the Act, is-
sue of excisability of goods and/or taxability of services
which has no nexus/relationship with rate of duty, would
only be appealable to this Court and not the Hon’ble Su-
preme Court.
(b) In support of the above, reliance is placed upon the decision
of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Customs v. Motorola
India Ltd., 2019 (368) E.L.T. 3. In the above case, the Apex
Court while dealing with an identical provision, viz. Sections
130(1) and 130E of the Customs Act, 1962, held that the ques-
tion of satisfaction of a condition in an exemption notifica-
tion, is not a question/issue relating to determination of rate
of duty for the purpose of assessment. This view was taken
after referring to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court
in Navin Chemicals (supra). Thus, appealable before the High
Court.
(c) Reliance was placed upon the decision of this court in Great-
ship (India) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Service Tax, Mumbai [Cen-
tral Excise (L) No. 20 of 2018, dated 24th March, 2015]. In the
above case, this Court after placing reliance upon the deci-
sion of the Apex Court in Navin Chemicals (supra), has taken
a view that an appeal to the Supreme Court with regard to
taxability of service or excisability of goods for the purpose
of assessment was a new condition/category which was
born by virtue of an amendment to Section 35L of the Act, by
insertion of sub-section (2) thereof on 6th August, 2014. Prior
thereto, the issues which could be dealt with by the Supreme
Court from the orders of the Tribunal, as culled out from
Navin Chemicals (supra), were as follows :-
(i) determination of a question relating to the rate of du-
ty
(ii) determination of a question relating to valuation of
the goods for the purpose of assessment
(iii) determination of question relating to classification of
goods under the tariff and whether or not they are
covered by an exemption notification, and
(iv) whether the value of goods for the purpose of as-
sessment could be enhanced or reduced having re-
gard with certain matters that the Act provides for.
(d) The insertion of sub-section (2) to Section 35L of the Act
w.e.f. 6th August, 2014 is itself evidence of the fact that prior
thereto, appeals in respect of taxability and excisability were
to the High Court. It is thus submitted that the issue of taxa-
bility or excisability being a rate of duty issue has only come
into force w.e.f. 6th August, 2014, when sub-section (2) of
Section 35L of the Act, was inserted. Thus, prior to the inser-
EXCISE LAW TIMES  15th April 2020  195