TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal Upholds Exemption for Agricultural Water Pumps</h1> <h3>COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (PORT), KOLKATA Versus ASIAN DIESEL SPARES</h3> COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (PORT), KOLKATA Versus ASIAN DIESEL SPARES - 2012 (280) E.L.T. 387 (Tri. - Kolkata) Issues involved:Delay in filing applications for condonation of delay, classification of imported goods under Notification No. 10/2006-C.E., interpretation of 'power-driven' pumps, relevance of Board's Circular, treatment of I.C. engine as integral part of power-driven water pump.Analysis:1. Delay in filing applications for condonation of delay: The Revenue filed applications for condonation of delay ranging from 61 to 86 days, which were condoned by the Tribunal based on the reasons explained in the applications.2. Classification of imported goods under Notification No. 10/2006-C.E.: The Commissioner (Appeals) granted the benefit of exemption under Notification No. 10/2006-C.E. to the respondents, who imported vertical centrifugal water pumps for agriculture. The Revenue contended that the benefit was allowed based on a Board's Circular to settle a classification dispute.3. Interpretation of 'power-driven' pumps: The Revenue argued that the benefit of the Notification is available only to manufacturers producing power-driven pumps and I.C. Engines together, driven exclusively by electric power. They claimed that the imported goods were not manufactured together and did not qualify for the benefit.4. Relevance of Board's Circular: The Respondent relied on a C.B.E.C. Circular to support their claim that power-driven water pumps are not necessarily required to be driven by electric power and can also be driven by a diesel engine. They argued that pump engines are manufactured separately by different manufacturers.5. Treatment of I.C. engine as integral part of power-driven water pump: The Tribunal examined the goods declared in the Bill of Entry and found that the contention of the P.D. pumps and diesel engine being brought separately was contrary to the facts. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals') decision based on the Board's Circular, which clarified that an I.C. engine may be treated as an integral part of a power-driven pump.6. Conclusion: The Tribunal found no merit in the Revenue's Appeals and upheld the Commissioner (Appeals') orders, dismissing the Revenue's Appeals. The Board's Circular supported the classification of the goods under the Notification, and the treatment of the I.C. engine as part of the power-driven pump was deemed appropriate based on the facts presented.This detailed analysis of the judgment covers the issues involved in the case comprehensively, providing a clear understanding of the Tribunal's decision and the legal reasoning behind it.
TaxTMI 