TIOL-DDT 2921
01 09 2016
Thursday

THE Supreme Court is the highest court of the land but within the Supreme Court, is there an intra-court of appeal? From one Bench to another?

On May 12 2016, a Bench consisting of Justice Chelameswar and Justice AM Sapre had a difference of opinion in Civil Appeal No. 1727 of 2016 (and several other connected appeals.) and they passed an order,

In view of the divergence of opinion in terms of separate judgments pronounced by us in these appeals today, the Registry is directed to place the papers before Hon'ble the Chief Justice of India for appropriate further orders.

Thus the case landed up in the court of a Larger Bench of Justice Jagdish Singh Khehar, Justice Kurian Joseph and Justice Arun Mishra. The Larger Bench on 28.07.2016 observed,

After hearing had gone on for sometime, wherein the limited issue canvassed was, whether this Court was justified in exercising jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, our attention was invited to the mandate contained in Article 145(5) of the Constitution, so as to suggest, that the entire controversy needed to be heard afresh...

........

We are of the view that the instant issue can be resolved by referring the matter back to the Bench, for a clarification, of the order dated 12th May, 2016, whether the reference required re-hearing of the entire matter, and if not, the limited issue referred for consideration.

We have chosen to adopt the above course, so as to save precious time of the Court. In the above view of the matter, the Registry is directed to place the files of this case, before Hon'ble the Chief Justice of India, for seeking clarification of the Division Bench which passed the order dated 12th May, 2016.

The case is back with the original Division Bench. The Division Bench on 30.08.2016, observed,

It appears from the above-mentioned order that, it was argued before the larger Bench that by the Order of this Bench dated 12th May, 2016, a Reference was made to a larger Bench. The submission is factually incorrect.

It is clear from the Order dated 12th May, 2016 that there was a disagreement between both of us regarding the final order to be passed in the appeals before us. …….

The only point of divergence between both of us is that whether the appellants should be disentitled to retain the benefits of the training in medical course which they secured by virtue of their being beneficiaries of a tainted examination process conducted for the purpose of admitting them for training in medical colleges.

..........

We completely fail to understand the reference made to Article 145(5) of the Constitution in the Order dated 28th July, 2016. We are of the opinion that neither the Constitution of India nor any other law of this country provides an intra-court appeal insofar as the Supreme Court is concerned. A re-hearing of the entire matter as apparently suggested to the larger Bench, in our opinion, would amount to an intra-court appeal. If the larger Bench of this Court wishes to create such an intra-court appeal, we obviously are powerless to stop it. We can only record our understanding of the law on the question and it is as recorded above.

........

Ordered accordingly.

Now, what will happen? Will the Chief Justice again refer the matter to the same Larger Bench to decide only on the point of difference?

Article 145(5) of the Constitution, to which a reference was made in the orders of the Larger Bench and Division Bench reads as:

No judgment and no such opinion shall be delivered by the Supreme Court save with the concurrence of a majority of the Judges present at the hearing of the case, but nothing in this clause shall be deemed to prevent a Judge who does not concur from delivering a dissenting judgment or opinion.

Rebate of State Levies on Export of Garments - Implementation by CBEC

THE Government of India has decided to adopt a mechanism wherein the rebate of State levies on garment exports is provided based on a budgetary allocation of the Ministry of Textiles under a scheme in which the Department of Revenue/Central Board of Excise and Customs (CBEC) handles disbursement along with the extant Duty Drawback.

The ROSL scheme is meant for exports of garments that are defined in the scheme as goods falling under Chapters 61 or 62 of the Schedule of All Industry Rates of Drawback. It is applicable to exports with Let Export Order dates from 20.9.2016 onwards. Though applicability is for three years, nonetheless based on changes in underlying conditions, the Central Government can adjust the rates of rebate.

Board wants Commissioners to provide adequate guidance to officers and exporters, and to facilitate the smooth functioning of the ROSL scheme.

Circular No. 43/2016-Customs., Dated August 31, 2016

FTP - export of articles of apparel - Special Advance Authorization Scheme

DGFT has amended the Hand Book of Procedures 2015-20 to specify the Procedure for Special Advance Authorisation scheme for export of Articles of Apparel and Clothing Accessories under Chapter 61 and 62 of ITC(HS) Classification of Export and Import. This comes into effect from 1 st September 2016.

DGFT Public Notice No.27/2015-2020., Dated August 31, 2016

FTP - export of articles of apparel - Special Advance Authorization Scheme

DGFT has explained the procedure in respect of the Special Advance Authorization Scheme that is effective from today:

Applications for grant of Special Advance Authorisation Scheme for export of Articles of Apparel and Clothing Accessories can be filed online through DGFT website. Procedure for filing application online for this authorisation is similar to filing of application for the regular Advance Authorisation. The normal Advance Authorisation Scheme which is in operation is still available for exporters. It is for the exporters to choose any scheme of their choice.

DGFT EDI system is designed to calculate value addition automatically based on FOB value of exports, CIF value of imports. Value of any other input used on which benefit of All Industry rate of Duty Drawback is claimed or intended to be claimed shall be equal to 22% of the FOB value of export realised and this value is factored in EDI system while calculating value addition.

DGFT Trade Notice No.15/2016., Dated August 31, 2016

Who's Who in Central Excise?

Ms. Janaki Arun Kumar is the the Principal Commissioner of the Chennai-I Central Excise Commissionerate. She also holds the additional charge of the post of Chief Commissioner of Central Excise Coimbatore Zone. She was also holding the post of Chief Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai. Yesterday the Board gave her the additional charge of the post of Principal Chief Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai. So, she is now the Principal Chief Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai, the Chief Commissioner of Central Excise, Coimbatore and the Principal Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai-I. It has become really very difficult to keep track of who is holding what post in the field under CBEC. And they don't update their websites and the officers are so busy that it is almost impossible to get them on phone.

We don't know whether there would be dual control in GST, but as of now, there is no clarity on how many controls we have in Central Excise and Service Tax - and where they are.

CBEC F.No.A.22011/3/2015-Ad.II., Dated August 31, 2016

Increase in Tariff Value of Oils; Gold and Silver Reduced

GOVERNMENT  has increased the tariff value of all the oils, but reduced that of Brass scrap, gold and silver.

Notification No. 118/2016-CUSTOMS (N.T.)., Dated: August 31, 2016

Until Tomorrow with more DDT

Have a nice day.

Mail your comments to vijaywrite@tiol.in