2014 (12) TMI 23 - AT - Customs

Appeal dismissed for imported Aluminium Profiles not meeting retail sale criteria under Notification No. 29/2010-Cus.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, upholding the lower authority's decision that the benefit of Notification No. 29/2010-Cus for importing Aluminium ... Exemption from payment of SAD to all pre-packaged goods - Import of Aluminium Profiles, hardware for furniture fittings - Benefit of Notification No. 29/2010-Cus dated 27.02.2010 - Held that:- The condition of the Notification is that the goods should be in pre-packaged condition intended for retail sale. The Notification further provides that the retail sale price be fixed as required under the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (now Legal Metrology Act, 2009) or the rules made thereunder. In the Bills of Entry the appellant declared the goods as 'Aluminium Profile, hardware furniture fittings'. The goods in question are further used by the furniture manufacture. We find as per the provisions of Legal Metrology Act and the Rules 2011 the provisions applicable to package intended for retail sale are not applicable in respect of packaged commodity meant for industrial consumers. The Legal Metrology Act further provides that retail sale is in relation to commodity means the sale, distribution or delivery of such commodity through retails shops or firms for same by a group of individual or another consumers. In the present case though the goods are pre-packed condition but it is not for retail sale as evident from the declaration filed in the Bills of Entry, the goods in question, are for manufacture of furniture. The buyers further use the item in question for manufacture of furniture and the provisions for packaged items intended for sale are not applicable in respect of packaged commodities meant for industrial consumers. - Decided against assessee. Issues:1. Appeal against the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) regarding the benefit of Notification No. 29/2010-Cus dated 27.02.2010 for import of Aluminium Profiles.2. Interpretation of the conditions of the Notification regarding pre-packaged goods intended for retail sale and the requirement to declare the retail sale price as per the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 or Legal Metrology Act, 2009.3. Determination of whether goods used for the manufacture of furniture qualify for the benefit of the Notification meant for goods intended for retail sale.Analysis:The appellant appealed against the Commissioner (Appeals) order, claiming the benefit of Notification No. 29/2010-Cus for importing Aluminium Profiles. The appellant argued that the goods were in pre-packaged condition for retail sale, fulfilling all conditions of the Notification, including having the MRP declared as required by the Standards of Weights and Measures Act. However, the Revenue contended that the goods were declared as hardware for furniture fittings in the Bills of Entry and were used by furniture manufacturers for making furniture, not for retail sale, citing the Legal Metrology Act, 2009. The dispute centered around whether the goods qualified as pre-packaged goods intended for retail sale under the Notification.The Tribunal noted that the Notification required goods to be in pre-packaged condition intended for retail sale, with the retail sale price declared as per the Standards of Weights and Measures Act or Legal Metrology Act. The appellant had declared the goods as hardware for furniture fittings in the Bills of Entry, and the goods were used by furniture manufacturers, not for direct retail sale. The Legal Metrology Act stipulated that provisions for packaged items intended for sale did not apply to commodities meant for industrial consumers. As the goods were used for manufacturing furniture and not directly sold to end consumers, the Tribunal found that the benefit of the Notification was not applicable. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed, upholding the lower authority's decision.In conclusion, the Tribunal's decision emphasized the specific conditions outlined in the Notification regarding pre-packaged goods intended for retail sale and the declaration of retail sale price. The judgment clarified that goods used for manufacturing purposes, even if pre-packaged, did not qualify for the benefit of the Notification meant for goods intended for direct retail sale. The interpretation of the Legal Metrology Act played a crucial role in determining the applicability of the Notification in this case, highlighting the distinction between goods meant for industrial consumers and those intended for retail sale.