Page 176 - ELT_15th August 2020_Vol 373_Part 4

510 EXCISE LAW TIMES [ Vol. 373

decides the Appeal on Revenue neutrality, the issue of valuation is not being vis-
ited by it.
9. On the aforesaid facts, we enquired of Shri. Jetly, the Learned Coun-
sel appearing for the Revenue as to whether this Appeal would at all be main-
tainable before this Court in view of Section 35G of the Act. This for the reason
that the grievance of the Revenue in this Appeal is that the impugned order has
not decided the issue of valuation, when the issue for its consideration was valu-
ation of IC Engines and parts thereof. We also invited his attention to the deci-
sion of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Steel Authority of India Ltd. v. Designated
Authority, Directorate General of Anti-Dumping & Allied Duties [2017 (349) E.L.T.
193 (S.C.)] in particular to paragraph 19 thereof which reads [as] under :
“19. On the basis of the discussion that have preceded, it must there-
fore be held that before admitting an appeal under Section 130E(b) of the
Customs Act, the following conditions must be satisfied :
(i) The question raised or arising must have a direct and/or prox-
imate nexus to the question of determination of the applicable
rate of duty or to the determination of the value of the goods
for the purposes of assessment of duty. This is a sine qua non
for the admission of the appeal before this Court under Sec-
tion 130E(b) of the Act.
(ii) The question raised must involve a substantial question of law
which has not been answered or, on which, there is a conflict
of decisions necessitating a resolution.
(iii) If the Tribunal, on consideration of the material and relevant
facts, had arrived at a conclusion which is a possible conclu-
sion, the same must be allowed to rest even if this Court is in-
clined to take another view of the matter.
(iv) The Tribunal had acted in gross violation of the procedure or
principles of natural justice occasioning a failure of justice.”
10. In response, Shri. Jetly the Learned Counsel submits as under :-
(a) The impugned order of the Tribunal does not deal with the issue of
valuation as it has only allowed the Respondent’s Appeal on the is-
sue of Revenue neutrality. The grievance of the Revenue is only to
the extent that the order is in breach of principle of natural justice as
the Tribunal has not dealt with the issue of valuation urged by the
Revenue;
(b) In case this Court concludes that there has been a breach of princi-
ple of natural justice in not deciding the issue of valuation, it would
only restore/remand the issue of valuation to the Tribunal. It is only
thereafter, when the Tribunal passes an order on remand that the
question of valuation would arise ousting the jurisdiction of this
Court, under Section 35G of the Act;
(c) Attention is drawn to paragraph 19 of Steel Authority of India Ltd.
(supra) to submit that it deals with regard to admission of the Ap-
peal and not with regard to the maintainability of an Appeal; and

EXCISE LAW TIMES  15th August 2020  176