Page 10 - ELT_15th August 2020_Vol 373_Part 4

viii EXCISE LAW TIMES [ Vol. 373

SUBJECT INDEX
[CASE LAW : CUSTOMS, EXCISE & EXIM]
Abetment to smuggling of seized foreign currency established, penalty
imposable on abettor - See under PENALTY ................... 570
Absolute confiscation required to be done of unauthorizedly procured
foreign currency concealed by outgoing passenger - See under
CONFISCATION .................................. 570
Adjudication - Remand proceedings - Refund - Issue remanded by CESTAT
for examining documents to prove that incidence of duty not passed on
to consumer - However, Assessing Authority completely lost sight of
exercise and proceeded merely on the basis of accounting entries,
methodology of accounting followed by petitioner and as to whether
duty reflected in ‘receivables’ or ‘profit and loss’ accounts — 3F Industries
Limited v. Asstt. Commr. of Customs, Nagapattinam (Mad.) ................. 463
Advance authorization - Extension of time for fulfilling pending export
obligation - See under EXIM ............................ 454
— Refund of CVD and SAD not admissible on failure to fulfill export
obligation - See under EXIM ............................ 550
Advance License Scheme, rebate admissible of duty paid on export goods in
discharge of export obligation - See under EXPORT REBATE .......... 562
Alternate remedy available, writ jurisdiction exercisable on account of
precedence - See under WRIT PETITION ..................... 470
Appeal to Appellate Tribunal - Departmental appeal, Maintainability of -
Monetary limits for prosecution of appeal - Tax component of ` 1,81,754
involved - HELD : Central Board of Excise & Customs vide extent
Instruction F.No. 390/Misc./163/2010-JC, dated 1-1-2016 clarified that
C.B.E. & C. Instruction F. No. 390/Misc./163/2010-JC, dated 17-12-2015,
whereunder monetary limits for Appellate Tribunal, High Courts and
Supreme Court entertaining appeal fixed, ought to be understood as also
applicable to all pending appeals before CESTAT and High Courts -
Hence, appeal pending as on date of 1-1-2016, within monetary limit
fixed under Circular dated 17-12-2015 not maintainable before CESTAT -
Tribunal could not have entertained appeal by Revenue and appeal
required to be dismissed as monetary limit fixed was ` 10 lac and in
instant case, quantum of Refund being subject matter of appeal, was `
1,81,754 - Substantial question of law answered in favour of assessee and
against Revenue - Section 35B of Central Excise Act, 1944 — West Coast
Optilinks v. Commissioner of Central Tax, Mysore (Kar.) ................... 504
Appeal to High Court - Jurisdiction - Effective date of Notification - Issue
involved in appeal is effective date of exemption of Customs duty against
Exim scrip scheme i.e. either from date of publication of Notification
under Customs Act, 1962 or date of grant of exemption by DGFT - Since,
it is not relatable to issue of rate of duty but to date from which
exemption applicable, High Court has jurisdiction to decide - In view of
above, appeal admitted for further disposal - Section 130 of Customs Act,
1962 — Commr. of C. Ex. & Service Tax, Haldia v. Ellenbarrie Exim Ltd. (Cal.) ........ 479
— Maintainability - Issue decided by Appellate Tribunal on the basis of
Revenue neutrality without going to contentions regarding valuation
raised by Department - Appeal from order in respect of valuation and/or
EXCISE LAW TIMES  15th August 2020  10