1998 (3) TMI 359 - AT - Customs

Tribunal grants customs duty exemption for Wind Operated Electricity Generators components

ELECON ENGINEERING CO. LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, MUMBAI-II

The Tribunal granted customs duty exemption under Notification 64/94 for certain components imported by the Appellants, manufacturers of Wind Operated ... Cables - Power Cables - eligible for benefit of exemption under Notification No. 64/94-Cus. Issues Involved:1. Eligibility for customs duty exemption under Notification 64/94.2. Mis-declaration of goods and imposition of penalty.3. Eligibility for exemption from additional duty of customs (CVD) under Notification 205/88.Summary of Judgment:1. Eligibility for Customs Duty Exemption under Notification 64/94:The Appellants, manufacturers of Wind Operated Electricity Generators (WOEG), imported components and claimed customs duty exemption u/s Notification 64/94. The Commissioner denied the exemption for power cables, earthing cables, wind farm computers, and components for brake hydraulics, oil and grease, Nacelle Light, Tower Light, and socket fittings. However, the Commissioner granted the exemption for Yaw components, brake calipers, brake hydraulics, and parts of the wind turbine controller, including control cables. The Tribunal found that power cables, being part of the inside cabling of the wind turbine controller, should be exempted under Notification 64/94, relying on a certificate from Brussels and the Supreme Court judgment in the BHEL case. However, earthing cables were not considered eligible for exemption as they were merely protective devices. Wind farm computers were also not exempted as they were not part of the WOEG.2. Mis-declaration of Goods and Imposition of Penalty:The Commissioner found no mis-declaration by the Appellants and dropped the charge. Consequently, no penalty was imposed on the Appellants u/s 112 of the Customs Act, 1962.3. Eligibility for Exemption from Additional Duty of Customs (CVD) under Notification 205/88:The Commissioner denied the exemption for CVD, distinguishing between different types of wind mills under Chapters 84 and 85. However, the Tribunal held that Notification 205/88 does not grant exemption based on tariff headings or chapters in the CETA. Since Serial No. 12 of the Notification covers parts of wind mills, the Tribunal extended the exemption from CVD to the subject goods, including power cables and brake hydraulics, as they were eligible for exemption under Notification 64/94. The Tribunal also noted that the Central Excise Department was extending this benefit to the goods manufactured by the Appellant.The appeal was disposed of in the above terms.