Just a moment...

Report
FeedbackReport
Bars
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2015 (1) TMI 793

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....uthority has confirmed a differential duty of Rs. 1,00,55,335/- on 13000 MTs of coal imported by the appellant, M/s. Millennium Steel India Pvt. Ltd., vide Bill of Entry No. 6667297 dated 27/04/2012 by classifying the same as 'bituminous coal' falling under CTH 2701 1200 and by denying the benefit of Notification No. 12/2012-Cus. Dated 17/03/2012. He has also confirmed interest liability on the said duty demand, apart from imposing penalty of Rs. 10 lakhs on the appellant. He has also confiscated the goods provisionally released with an option to redeem the same on payment of fine of Rs. 50 lakhs. Aggrieved of the same the appellant is before us. 3. The facts of the case are that the appellant imported coal declaring the same as &#....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....alue has to be determined on the basis of ash + moisture content and not on air dry basis and, therefore, computation of the volatile matter content and the gross calorific value by the department is incorrect. It is also argued that prior to 17/12/2012, the appellant had imported similar material which was declared as 'steam coal' and the duty was paid on that basis and the Revenue had never raised any objection. Accordingly, it is prayed that stay be granted. 5. The learned Additional Commissioner (AR) appearing for the Revenue, on the other hand, submits that when the statute itself defines 'bituminous coal' as coal having a volatile matter content of more 14% and a gross calorific value of more than 5833 kcal/kg classif....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rnational Industries vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax, Uttar Pradesh 1981 (8) ELT 325 (S.C.) "if any term or expression has been defined in the enactment, then it must be understood in the sense in which it is defined but in the absence of any definition being given in the enactment the meaning of the term in common parlance or commercial parlance has to be adopted." In the present case, since the Customs Tariff defines 'bituminous coal' by means of certain specifications and if those specifications are satisfied, the goods will have to be classified as 'bituminous coal' only and not otherwise. 6.2 We had also considered an identical matter in the case of Finolex Industries Ltd. and Gupta Coal India Pvt. Ltd. [Order No. S/1193....