Yesterday's Supreme Court Orders Today
TODAY, we bring you three Supreme Court judgements delivered yesterday with our Head Notes and analyses.
++ Customs – Exemption – Import by a partner of a JV is not import by JV – Exemption Notification to be interpreted strictly; it is well settled that a provision providing for an exemption has to be construed strictly; Tribunal as an institution and not the personality of the members constituting it; Cannot overrule the decision of a co-ordinate Bench: It needs to be emphasised that if a Bench of a Tribunal, in identical fact-situation, is permitted to come to a conclusion directly opposed to the conclusion reached by another Bench of the Tribunal on earlier occasion, that will be destructive of the institutional integrity itself. What is important is the Tribunal as an institution and not the personality of the members constituting it. If a Bench of the Tribunal wishes to take a view different from the one taken by the earlier Bench, the propriety demands that it should place the matter before the President of the Tribunal so that the case is referred to a larger Bench, for which provision exists in the Act itself. A Coordinate Bench of a Court cannot pronounce judgment contrary to declaration of law made by another Bench.
++ Central Excise – Section 3A - Rule 5 of the 1997 Rules will be attracted for determination of the annual capacity of production; it must logically follow that Rule 5 cannot be ignored in relation to a situation arising on account of an intimation under Rule 4(2) of the 1997 Rules: Merely because in some cases revenue has not questioned the correctness of an order on the same issue, no bar for the revenue to challenge the order in another case: There can be host of factors, like the amount of revenue involved, divergent views of the Tribunals/High Courts on the issue, public interest etc. which may be a just cause, impelling the revenue to prefer an appeal on the same view point of the Tribunal which had been accepted in the past.
++ Customs – Jurisdiction of DRI to issue Show Cause Notice – Matter remanded to Tribunal: Having carefully gone through the appeal, wherein the jurisdiction of the DRI to issue a show cause notice under Section 28 of the Act as a "proper officer" has been specifically questioned, the said issue is a substantial question of law, and requires to be examined afresh particularly in light of the decision of Supreme Court in; Sayed Ali & Anr. - (), where the question as to who is a "proper officer" in terms of Section 2(34) of the Act has been examined.