1991 (8) TMI 184 - AT - Customs

CEGAT Tribunal Upheld Customs Classification for Nylon Cloth; Refund Appeal Dismissed

The Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, New Delhi dismissed the appeal regarding the refund of countervailing duty on imported nylon belting cloth. The Tribunal ... Classification Issues:- Claim for refund of countervailing duty on nylon belting cloth imported- Interpretation of Notification No. 221/82-C.E. and Additional Duties of Excise (Goods of Special Importance) Act, 1957- Classification of imported goods as component parts of machinery- Applicability of duty under the Additional Duties (Goods of Special Importance) Act, 1957Analysis:The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, New Delhi involved the rejection of the appellants' claim for a refund of countervailing duty on nylon belting cloth imported in April 1985. The goods were charged countervailing duty under Items 18 and 22(1) of the Central Excise Tariff. The appellants argued that since Notification No. 221/82 granted exemption from excise duty, the imposition of additional duty under the Additional Duties of Excise (Goods of Special Importance) Act, 1957 was unwarranted.The appellants further contended that their imported goods, nylon belting cloth cut to size and shape for use as spare parts of flour milling machinery, should not be subject to countervailing duty based on a previous order by the Central Government regarding the classification of similar goods. The Departmental Representative, however, maintained that the goods were correctly classified as textile fabric under the Customs Tariff and were liable for duty under the Additional Duties (Goods of Special Importance) Act, 1957.Upon careful consideration, the Tribunal analyzed the relevant Customs Tariff provisions and noted that belting cloth fell under Heading 59.16/17, precluding its classification as a component part of machinery. The Tribunal highlighted that the exemption under Notification No. 221/82 did not absolve the goods from additional duty under the said Act. The Tribunal rejected both pleas by the appellants, emphasizing that the additional duty was supplementary to excise duty, as explicitly stated in the legislation.In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal, affirming the lower authorities' decision to reject the claim for a refund of countervailing duty on the imported nylon belting cloth. The judgment clarified the classification of the goods, the application of duty under the Additional Duties (Goods of Special Importance) Act, 1957, and the legal interpretation of relevant notifications and tariff provisions.