2016 (11) TMI 217 - AT - Customs

Imported Goods Misclassified: Duty Benefit Denied under C.Ex Notification 6/2002.

The Tribunal upheld the classification of imported goods under Central Excise Notification No.6/2002-C.Ex, denying the appellant's duty benefit claim due ... Classification of imported goods under tariff headings - eligibility for Nil rate of duty under Central Excise Notification No.6/2002-C.Ex - distinction between CD-ROM drive and CDRW for concessionary benefit - classification as 'others' under Tariff Heading 8471.70.90 - mis-declaration with intent to evade dutyClassification of imported goods under tariff headings - eligibility for Nil rate of duty under Central Excise Notification No.6/2002-C.Ex - distinction between CD-ROM drive and CDRW for concessionary benefit - classification as 'others' under Tariff Heading 8471.70.90 - mis-declaration with intent to evade duty - Whether the appellants were entitled to Nil rate of duty under Notification No.6/2002-C.Ex in respect of imported CDRW and whether the claim amounted to mis declaration - HELD THAT: - The Tribunal examined the scope of entry 261A of Notification No.6/2002-C.Ex and noted that the entry expressly extends the nil rate benefit to items such as CD-ROM drive but does not include CDRW (Compact Disc Re Writer). The authorities correctly classified the imported CDRW under the residual description as 'others' within Tariff Heading 8471.70.90 rather than under the specific subheading applicable to hard disk drives. Since the concession in entry 261A does not cover CDRW, the appellants' claim of exemption was not sustainable. The Tribunal concurred with the original authority's conclusion that the declaration was incorrect and observed that the factual position amounted to mis-declaration aimed at securing exemption that was not available.Claim for Nil rate benefit under Notification No.6/2002-C.Ex in respect of CDRW is rejected and the appeal is dismissed.Final Conclusion: The appeal is dismissed: the imported CDRW do not fall within entry 261A of Notification No.6/2002-C.Ex and are properly classifiable under 8471.70.90, hence not eligible for the Nil rate benefit; the assessment and denial of exemption are upheld. Issues:Classification of imported goods under Central Excise Notification No.6/2002-C.Ex for duty benefit.Analysis:The case involved the classification of imported goods, specifically 200 'CDRW,' under Central Excise Notification No.6/2002-C.Ex for duty benefit. The appellant imported the goods and declared an assessable value based on the invoice price. They claimed a Nil rate of duty benefit under the said notification, citing the goods falling under Sl. No. 261A and classification CTH 8471.70.60. However, Customs classified the goods under 8471.70.90 as 'others,' not eligible for the claimed benefit, requiring payment of 16% advolerum of additional duties. A demand notice was issued under the Customs Act, 1962, questioning the benefit claimed and seeking recovery of duties. The Assistant Commissioner confirmed the proposals, leading to the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals).The Tribunal noted that the appellant had availed the benefit of Notification No.6/2002-CX during import to claim nil payment of CVD, asserting that the imported item, CDRW, fell under Sl.No. 261A of the notification. However, the Tribunal observed that entry 261A of the notification specifically mentioned CD-ROM drive, not CDRW. It was determined that CDRW should be classified as 8471.7090, distinct from the specific headings under 8471-70, making the appellant ineligible for the exemption claimed. The Tribunal concluded that the case constituted a clear mis-declaration of goods, finding no merits in the appeal and subsequently dismissing it.In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the classification of the imported goods as per Central Excise Notification No.6/2002-C.Ex, denying the appellant's claim for duty benefit due to the mis-declaration of the goods. The decision reaffirmed the specific classification requirements under the notification and emphasized the importance of accurate declaration to avail duty exemptions, ultimately resulting in the dismissal of the appeal.