Waiver of Duty & Penalty Granted for CTV Sub-Assemblies

The appellant sought waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty amounting to Rs. 16.56 crores for clearing CTV sub-assemblies without affixing MRP. The adjudicating authority held them liable under Notification No. 5/01. The appellant argued based on precedents like Sony India Ltd. and Bigesto Foods P. Ltd. The court found merit in the appellant's case, waiving the pre-deposit of duty and penalty for the appeal hearing, directing to list the appeals with other relevant cases. Judgment was pronounced on 4-5-2005 by S.S. Kang, Vice-President.

---

---

Issues:
Waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty for the appellant.

Analysis:
The appellant filed applications seeking waiver of pre-deposit of duty amounting to Rs. 16.56 crores and an equal penalty, with penalties also imposed on the employees. The case involved the appellant, engaged in manufacturing CTV sub-assemblies, clearing them to original equipment manufacturers without affixing MRP, leading to show cause notices. The adjudicating authority applied Interpretative Rule 2(a) of Tariff, holding the appellants liable to pay duty under Sr. 221(ii) of Notification No. 5/01 for clearing complete TV sets disguised as sub-assemblies.

The appellant argued that since the Revenue acknowledged the clearance of TV sets, the responsibility for affixing MRP lies with the original equipment manufacturers. Citing the decision in Sony India Ltd. v. CCE, New Delhi, and a stay order in M/s. Bigesto Foods P. Ltd. v. CCE, the appellant contended for waiver based on similar situations and Supreme Court precedents. The Revenue's stance was that the appellants cleared TV sets without MRP, thus ineligible for benefits under Notification No. 5/01. However, the Revenue's position was not on the nature of clearance but on treating the appellants' actions as clearing complete colored TVs, as per Interpretative Rule 2(a) of the Tariff.

Considering the Supreme Court's decision in Sony India Ltd. and the Tribunal's stay order in Bigesto Foods P. Ltd., it was found that the appellant had a strong case in their favor. Consequently, the pre-deposit of duty and penalty was waived for the appeal hearing, with directions to list the appeals along with other relevant cases. The judgment was dictated and pronounced in open court on 4-5-2005 by S.S. Kang, Vice-President.

---