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 / RSS

2024 (6) TMI 400

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ified the consignment under 54.07. The Revenue was under the impression that all the 182 consignments were to be ultimately used for the manufacture of umbrella and were not impregnated fabrics. Accordingly, Show Cause Notice was issued in respect of 182 consignments seeking to classify the same under CTH 54.07. The samples were collected and sent for testing through various institutions. After due process, the Commissioner has held that the 181 consignments were coated/impregnated fabrics and hence he upheld the classification of 5903 adopted by the Appellant. Accordingly, he dropped the demand in respect of 181 consignments. In respect of 1 consignment, the Appellant had themselves adopted the CTH of 5407 and they had paid the applicable ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dvocate for the importer submits that the issue is fairly covered by this Bench's decision in the case of Commissioner of Customs (Port), Kolkata vs. Umbar Marketing Private Limited decided vide Final Order No.75547/2023 dated 06.06.2023. He submits that in that case also the samples were drawn and sent for testing and after testing reports are received and Adjudicating authority had dropped the demands. Being aggrieved, the Revenue had filed their Appeal before the Tribunal which came to be dismissed by this Bench. He further submits that in that case, the Respondent was also granted the consequential relief by way of refund. 4. He further submits that no further Appeal has been filed against the order of the Bench before the High Court/S....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....se of a product cannot necessarily be the determining factor for classification of the goods as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Indian Aluminium Cables vs UOI . For classification of the goods the nature of material used is a very relevant factor. 19. We find that Chapter 54 covers various types of fabrics. The details available in the Test Report received from RLTC or IIT, Delhi does not contain various other parameters required for classification of Customs the product under a specific sub-heading in Chapter 54. The Department has proposed the classification of the goods under the Chapter Heading 54071014 as umbrella cloth cotton fabrics. The relevant sub-heading is reproduced below:- 5407-Woven fabrics of synthetic....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he case of Indian Aluminium Cables vs UOI, end use alone cannot determine the classification. The other parameters such as the nature of cloth, nature of coating etc are required to be ascertained to classify the fabrics. Further when the fabrics are coated and the coating is visible to naked eye, the fabrics are classifiable only under Chapter 59 of the Customs Tarriff Act. Thus, we observe that coated fabrics visible to naked eye would fall under Chapter 59 only. But, the specific sub heading under which it is to be classified will depend on the nature of the material coated. ..................................... 22. We also find that the above judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court has been relied by the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tr....