ORDER
K.S. Venkataramani, Member (T)
1. The application is against the impugned order of the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Airport, Mumbai whereby the Commissioner (Appeals) has set aside the order dated 18-10-1995 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Customs classifying the Ultrasonic Lace Sewing Machine under sub-heading 8452.29 of Customs Tariff Act as against sub-heading 8479.89 CTA. The Commissioner has also directed the AC to once again consider the merits of the case.
2. The ld. Counsel Shri V.S. Nankani for the applicant submits that Commissioner (Appeals) has given a clear finding on the Review Application before him by the Department that the classification of the goods under Heading 84.52 decided by the AC is not correct but that it should be correctly classifiable under Heading 84.79 of CTA. Having done so, the ld. Counsel pleads that the fresh adjudication ordered by the Commissioner (Appeals) will be a duplication of effort since the appeal against the impugned order on classification is pending before the Tribunal. He therefore submits that the Tribunal may direct the AC not to go ahead with the de novo proceedings till the matter is settled by the Tribunal.
3. We have heard Shri K.L. Ramteke, the ld. DR. We find that the Commissioner (Appeals) in his order has gone into the merits of the case and has expressed his clear findings that the machine imported would be more appropriately classifiable under Heading 84.79 and not as conventional sewing machine under Heading 84.52 of CTA. Having come to such a conclusion after application of mind to the issue, we find that the remand of the issue to the AC will not serve any purpose. In such a situation, when the matter on classification has been decided by the Commissioner (Appeals), and is now before the Tribunal, we agree with the applicant that it will be inappropriate for the AC to proceed with the de novo adjudication directed by the Commissioner (Appeals). We therefore in the peculiar facts of this case, order that this de novo adjudication may be held in abeyance until the matter is pronounced upon by the Tribunal which is seized of the issue by way of the applicant’s appeal before it. The application is accordingly disposed off.