Advance Ruling - Board Clarifies
AS per clause (b) of the first proviso to Sub-section (2) of Section 23D of the Central Excise Act, the Authority for Advance Ruling shall not allow the application where the question raised therein is the same as in a matter already decided by the Appellate Tribunal or any Court.
CBEC now clarifies in an INSTRUCTION that the true import of the above provisions is that the issue/question of law which stands already, decided by the Appellate Tribunal or any Court in the case of any party will fall outside the purview of the Authority for Advance Rulings under the provisions of
(i) Clause (b) of the first proviso to Sub-Section (2) of Section 23D of the Central Excise Act, 1944,
(ii) Clause (b) of the first proviso to Sub-Section (2) of Section 28I of the Customs Act, 1962,
(iii) Clause (b) of the first proviso to Sub-Section (2) of Section 96D of the Finance Act, 1994.
Board also informs the Authority - "However, care may be taken by the Authority to satisfy itself that the issue/question of law decided by the Tribunal or Court fully and squarely covers the issue/question of law raised by the applicant ."
Now, the AAR is headed by a former Supreme Court Judge and the Member is a former Member of the CBEC. Is the Board competent to clarify to a Supreme Court Judge as to What the meaning of a sentence in the Customs Act/CEA is and can the Board direct the AAR to take care while deciding an application? Is it not judicial contempt? In any case, it is injudicious audacity.
CBEC Instruction in F.No.275/83/2012-CX.8A, Dated: November 29, 2013