TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (8) TMI 396
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....FEEP comprising of Equipments, Drawings, Designs and Plans are classifiable under Chapter Heading 49.01 or 49.06 of Schedule I of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 and the Company is entitled to the benefit under Notification Nos. 107/93-Cus. dated 30.03.1993 and 38/94-Cus. dated 01.03.1994 or they are classifiable under Chapter Heading 4911.99 as contended by the department. Relevant tariff entry, HSN and respective notifications were reproduced in para 22 to 26 of the reported Judgment to examine the issue. In para 50 of the Judgment, Hon'ble Court observed that when the expression 'book' is not defined in the Act, natural and ordinary meaning of the said expression must be kept in view. 3. Counsel for Revenue contended before Hon'ble Court that Elecon Engineers Ltd. and Scientific Engineering Housing Ltd's case were rendered in the context of income tax law. The basic issue therein was - whether 'books' were covered by the entry 'plant' under the Income Tax Act. Those decision, therefore, have no relevance to the issue in question since the Custom tariff entries are different from income tax. It was also submitted on behalf of Revenue that since t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Bench in Associated Cement Co. Ltd. 2001 (128) ELT 21(SC) was also considered relevant while deciding classification and the basic heading was 49.01. 6. With all the above observation, the question of leviability of duty on drawing and design was left to Tribunal for decision keeping the fact situation of the case in hand. 7. In the present appeal, M/s KB&T (changed to GIVO Ltd.) imported drawing/ design/ documents through DHL Courier Service during March 1994 to October 1995 without payment of Customs duty thereon. The value of such import was Rs. 20 lakhs US$ as per Collaboration agreement dated 24.11.1993 between appellant and M/s KBSH, M/s Thakral Investments Holdings Pvt. Ltd. Singapore and M/s GMF. Ld. Adjudicating Authority held that the drawing/design/documents imported were goods in terms of section 2(22) of Customs Act, 1962 and related to imported machinery and goods were liable to Customs duty and there was a transfer of property in such goods came to India on import, with a value. 8. The issues before learned adjudicating Authority were: (i) Whether the impugned items are goods or not? (ii) Issue of classification and defini....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ot get appreciation by ld. Adjudicating Authority on the ground that the definition of goods in Section 2(22) of the Customs Act was an inclusive definition and was wide enough to cover the drawings, designs etc. 14. Upon adjudication, ld. Adjudicating Authority confiscated the drawing and design under section 124 of the Customs Act, 1962 imported through DHL (Courier) valued at Rs. 6,31,00,000/- (CIF) and imposed duty of Rs. 12,62,00,000/- (Rupees Twelve Crores and Sixty Two Lakhs only) holding that the impugned goods were classifiable under Chapter 98.03 as 'Baggage', in terms of Notification No. 86/94-Cus dated 1.3.94 invoking extended period under proviso to Section 28(1) of the Customs Act, 1962. Also for violation of section 111(m) and (o) of the Customs Act, 1962 redemption fine of Rs. 2,00,00,000/- (Rupees Two Crores only) was imposed under Section 125 of the customs Act, 1962. 15. Further, for violation of Notification No. 86/94-Cus dated 1.3.94, penalty of Rs. 2,00,00,000/- (Rupees Two Crores only) was imposed on the appellant under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 and penalty of Rs. 1,00,00,000/- (Rupees One Crores only) was imposed on Sh. M.K. Dhir, the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ly stipulates that the goods are to be classified under the heading which occurs last in numerical order. Consequently, in any event, the items imported are to be classified only under Heading 99.10. 16.6 The appellants submit that the textual material and the drawings were supplemental to each other. The drawings, designs, specimens and documentation would all be covered by Heading 99.10 being for instructional purposes. The Commissioner has erred in not upholding this even after being shown the exact items imported. 16.7 Alternately, the appellants had sought classification under Heading 49.01. The appellants had shown that the textual material which came in printed book form. At the relevant point of time when the drawings, designs, specimens and documentation in question were imported, Notification No. 38/94 was in operation. According to the terms of this Notification, Printed Books (including covers for Printed Books) are exempt from the whole of duty of Customs. 16.8 The impugned order classifying the drawings, designs, specimens and documentation in question under Heading 98.03 is incorrect and unsustainable. Heading 98.03 does not cover courier imports as cargo. Accordi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o Customs duty. 16.11 There was no suppression or mis-declaration and the imports were proper. In such circumstances, the extended period is not invokable. The appellants were all along under a bona fide belief that the items imported being specifically for instructional purposes are free of duty under Chapter Heading 99.10. The issue involved in the present case is purely a question of law relating to classification on the basis of Notification 86/94-Cus. Therefore adjudication is time barred. 17.1 It was submitted on behalf of Revenue that drawing, design and technical documents imported through courier is liable to duty since such documents were not covered under Heading 49.01 not being books or part thereof. Those had no characteristics of books. The goods imported were covered under sub-heading 98.03 being baggage brought by courier. Therefore the adjudication resulted in confiscation of drawing, design and documents valued at Rs. 6,31,00,000/- under section 111(m)(o) of the Customs Act, 1962 with the consequence of levy of duty on the appellant company and penalty on the company as well as on Sri Dhir. When the appellant as well as the courier failed to provide information ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....igns and technical documents classifiable under Customs Tariff Heading 98.03 were imported through courier without payment of duty. There was suppression of value thereof at the time of import. Statement recorded from Mr. MK Dhir, Vice Chairman on 19.01.1998, showed that in terms of technical collaboration agreement dated 24.11.1993, the drawings, designs and documents were imported around 1994 through courier and price thereof was USD 2 millions. The technical collaboration agreement was meant for supply of plant and equipments as well as supply of drawings and designs and rendering of technical assistance and training. 20. On the above background, the controversy arose was as to whether the drawings, designs and documents shall be liable to custom duty, or exempt from duty being books. The Show Cause Notice disclosed the custom Tariff Heading 98.03 attracting duty and the said heading reads as: "all dutiable articles imported by a passenger or a member of crew in his baggage". But appellant pleaded that the import shall fall under the tariff heading 49.01, which reads as "printed books, brochures, leaflets and similar printed matters, whether or not in single sheet". 21. The ap....