Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2006 (11) TMI 467

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ication No. 20/99-Cus. dated 28-2-1999 [Sl. No. 175 in the Table annexed thereto]. The goods were provisionally assessed in terms of the Notification and accordingly they were cleared on payment of duty by the assessee. Subsequently, the Customs authorities proposed to finalize the assessments without extending the benefit of the Notification to the goods. The assessee contested this proposal, through counsel, before the adjudicating authority. The Deputy Commissioner rejected the assessee's contentions and held that the benefit of concessional rates of duty was not admissible to the imported equipments in terms of Entry No. 2 or Entry No. 5 of List No. 29 appended to Sl. No. 175 of the Table annexed to Notification No. 20/99-Cus. ibid. Acc....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... is whether the subject equipments were specified in List 29 appended to Sl. No. 175 of the Table annexed to the Notification. It appears, the importer initially claimed under Entry No. 2 and Entry No. 5 of this List. The original authority rejected both these claims. The first appellate authority upheld the decision of the lower authority in relation to Entry No. 2. The assessee has not appealed against this decision of the appellate authority. The appellate authority granted the benefit of Entry No. 5 of List 29 to the assessee and the department is in appeal against the same. Thus the only dispute arising in this case is whether the equipments imported by the respondents can be considered to be 'BTS ancillary equipment' specified at Entr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....K E-programme. MINI-LINK E is a general product for connections carrying nx2 Mbps traffic, and is designed primarily to meet increased demands for more efficient transmission systems in mobile telephone networks. Figure 1-2. Example of a cellular mobile telephone network, where MINI-LINK products connect radio base stations to switching centres  Figure 1-3. Example of a public network using AXE systems, where remote subscriber access units are connected to the network with MINI-LINK products The appellant has not contested the authenticity of the above literature and therefore we accept the same and sustain the findings of the appellate Commissioner. 5. In the case of Spice Telecom (supra), radio terminals imported ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Digital Speech and control information from the BTS equipment to the BSC, through the outdoor units and the antennas. Each communication link consists of one set comprising of two numbers Radio Terminal (IDU, ODU) and antennas at both ends. From the above it is very clear that without the Radio Terminals there cannot be any interconnectivity between BTS and BTS or BSC or MSC. In view of this the Radio Terminals definitely qualify to be ancillary equipments for BTS. On going through the technical literature it is seen that without the Radio Terminal there cannot be any interconnectivity at all and the Cellular Telephony System would not work. Hence, we hold that the imported items namely, Radio Terminals should be considered as BTS ancillar....