TIK-LIG LTD. Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The reference made in these appeals earlier to the Larger Bench has been returned by order dated 1 -9 -2003 to the regular Bench for being heard in the light of the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in dismissing the appeal filed by the Revenue against the decision of the Tribunal in a group of other matters against which that appeal was preferred to the Supreme Court and later not pressed. It is brought to our notice by the learned Counsel appearing for the appellants that the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. D19381/2002 filed by the Commissioner of Customs, Chennai against the CEGAT order No. 1761/01, dated 29 -11 -2001 (Commissioner of Customs, Chennai v. Vikrant Tyres Ltd.) passed the following order on 17 -2 -2003 : -

(2.) We may note here that on 17 -2 -2003, when the Hon'ble Supreme Court made the above order dismissing appeals as not pressed, a reference that had arisen from the present appeals was already pending before the Tribunal. The question that was referred in the order of reference made on 12 -7 -2003 in Customs Appeal No. 228/98 (TTK LIG Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, Chennai) reads as under : -

(3.) In the above background, the learned Counsel for the appellants has strongly contended before us that when the Revenue has accepted the legal position in several cases by not challenging those decisions, then it was not open to the Revenue to raise a contrary contention in the case of another assessee. It was submitted that the Revenue cannot pick and choose the assessee for refund of duty and that there has to be some certainty in the matter of levy and collection of duties. It was also argued that having accepted the judgment of the Tribunal and the legal position by not pressing the appeals, upon instructions, before the Supreme Court, the Revenue cannot be permitted to raise a contrary contention in these appeals whether before this regular Bench or even before the Larger Bench. The learned Counsel placed reliance on the following decisions in support of his contentions: -