1997 (4) TMI 182 - AT - Customs

Appeal dismissed for lack of evidence on item classification. Invoice and catalogue did not support appellants' claim.

The appeal was dismissed as the appellants failed to provide adequate evidence to support their claim that the items in question constituted a single High ... Classification of imported parts as a complete unit in knock-down condition - benefit under Notification No. 105/89-Cus. for goods falling under Heading 90.27 - evidentiary requirement for reclassification (invoice and catalogue) - upholding assessment on merits where items invoiced and priced separately - burden of proof on importer to establish composite nature of importsClassification of imported parts as a complete unit in knock-down condition - benefit under Notification No. 105/89-Cus. for goods falling under Heading 90.27 - evidentiary requirement for reclassification (invoice and catalogue) - burden of proof on importer to establish composite nature of imports - upholding assessment on merits where items invoiced and priced separately - Whether the imported items constituted a complete High Pressure Liquid Chromatograph (HPLC) in knock-down condition and were therefore entitled to benefit under Notification No. 105/89-Cus. for goods falling under Heading 90.27 - HELD THAT: - The Tribunal examined the documentary evidence produced by the appellant and found that the Bill of Entry and the supplier's catalogue were not placed before the Tribunal. The invoice described individual components by name and showed separate prices, and did not indicate that the supplied goods constituted a single complete HPLC system in knock-down form. In the absence of affirmative documentary proof to demonstrate that the parts formed a composite unit, the Assistant Collector's assessment treating the items separately was supported on merits. The Tribunal emphasised that the onus lay on the importer to produce sufficient evidence (such as the Bill of Entry and catalogue or explicit invoicing indicating a knock-down unit) to justify reclassification and grant of the notification benefit; those evidentiary requirements were not satisfied here.Appeal rejected; original assessment upheld and refund claim denied for want of evidence that the imports were a single HPLC unit in knock-down condition entitled to the notification benefit.Final Conclusion: The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, holding that in the absence of the Bill of Entry, catalogue or any invoice indication that the items formed a single HPLC system in knock-down condition, the assessment treating the items separately was rightly upheld and the claim under Notification No. 105/89-Cus. was not allowable. The appeal was regarding the rejection of a refund claim for re-assessment of goods described in the Bill of Entry as Binary Gradient Pump, Diode Array Detector, and Chart Paper. The appellants claimed these items to be a complete unit of High Pressure Liquid Chromatograph in knock-down condition. However, the Asstt. Collector and Collector upheld the original assessment on merits as the invoice and catalogue did not support that all items constituted a single HPLC System. The appellants did not provide sufficient evidence to prove their claim, leading to the rejection of the appeal.