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 Rejection of Duty Benefit Claim for Imported Titanium Pipes</h1> <h3>M/s. Chemplast Sanmar Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Customs, (Import) Chennai</h3> M/s. Chemplast Sanmar Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Customs, (Import) Chennai - 2018 (364) E.L.T. 345 (Tri. - Chennai) Issues: Classification of imported Titanium Pipes and Fittings as parts of Bi Polar Membrane Electrolyser for duty benefit under Notification No. 21/2002-Cus.Analysis:1. Facts and Background: The appellants imported Titanium Pipes and Fittings from Italy to be used with the Bi Polar Membrane Electrolyser. The claim for duty benefit under Notification No. 21/2002-Cus was rejected, leading to an appeal before the Tribunal.2. Appellant's Arguments: The appellant argued that the Titanium Pipes and Fittings were essential for handling brine in the Membrane Electrolyser, as advised by the supplier from Japan. They cited various case laws to support their contention.3. Respondent's Arguments: The respondent contended that the imported Titanium Pipes and Fittings were not specifically made for the Membrane Electrolyser and were separately imported from Italy. They argued that these items were not integral components of the Membrane Electrolyser.4. Core Issue: The main issue was whether the imported Titanium Pipes and Fittings could be considered as parts of the Membrane Electrolyser, thus qualifying for duty benefit under the relevant notification.5. Legal Provisions: The Tribunal examined the relevant Notification No. 21/2002-Cus and its subsequent amendment, which provided duty exemption for parts of Membrane Electrolysers. The amendment clarified the scope of parts eligible for the benefit.6. Precedent and Interpretation: The Tribunal referred to a Supreme Court judgment regarding the definition of 'parts' as essential components without which the whole cannot function. Applying this definition, the Tribunal found that the generic Titanium Pipes and Fittings were not specifically designed for integration with the Membrane Electrolyser.7. Decision: The Tribunal dismissed the appeals, concluding that the imported Titanium Pipes and Fittings were not specialized or essential parts of the Membrane Electrolyser but rather generic items obtained to complete its functioning. Therefore, they did not qualify for duty benefit as parts under the notification.8. Final Verdict: The Tribunal upheld the rejection of the appellant's claim for duty benefit on the grounds that the imported Titanium Pipes and Fittings did not meet the criteria of being essential, specially designed parts of the Membrane Electrolyser. The appeals were dismissed accordingly.
TaxTMI 