TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether bunkers, fuel oil, consumable stores, drinks and foodstuff found on board an imported vessel for breaking were classifiable as part of the vessel under Heading 89.08 or were separately dutiable under their respective tariff headings. (ii) Whether 1% landing charges were includible in the assessable value of the imported vessel.
Issue (i): Whether bunkers, fuel oil, consumable stores, drinks and foodstuff found on board an imported vessel for breaking were classifiable as part of the vessel under Heading 89.08 or were separately dutiable under their respective tariff headings.
Analysis: The accepted customs guidelines distinguished between equipment and consumables on board a vessel. Fuel and oil contained in the vessel's machinery and engines could form part of the vessel, but remaining fuel, oil and other ship stores, including foodstuff and drinks, were to be classified separately in their own appropriate headings. The Tribunal held that the vessel could not be construed to include everything kept on board and that the balance bunkers and stores were not an integral part of the vessel. The classification adopted by the original authority and affirmed in appeal was based on the CBEC circular and internationally accepted norms.
Conclusion: The separate classification and levy of duty on the disputed bunkers, fuel oil and ship stores were upheld, and this issue was decided against the appellant.
Issue (ii): Whether 1% landing charges were includible in the assessable value of the imported vessel.
Analysis: The assessable value of imported goods includes charges associated with delivery at the place of importation. Landing charges were treated as part of the import value because they were connected with the goods reaching the land mass, and their inclusion did not depend on whether duty was paid before or after filing the bill of entry. The Tribunal also relied on the settled principle that such charges are includible in assessable value.
Conclusion: The addition of 1% landing charges to the assessable value was upheld, and this issue was decided against the appellant.
Final Conclusion: The appeals failed on both the classification of on-board consumables and the inclusion of landing charges in assessable value, so the assessment and consequential duty liability remained undisturbed.
Ratio Decidendi: Consumables and remaining bunkers on an imported vessel for breaking are not automatically part of the vessel for customs classification, and charges associated with delivery at importation form part of assessable value.
TaxTMI 
