TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (10) TMI 158
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Bill of Entry in the presence of representatives of the Customs Broker of the appellant and formed the opinion that goods/plates imported by the appellants are CTCP plates however for comparison they drew the sample and sent the same for testing initially to the department of Printing Technology, Pusa Polytechnic, New Delhi. 1.1 A test report dated 03.06.2015 was received confirming the samples in question to be CTCP Printing Plates. But the report was withdrawn as the testing was out sourced for want of proper infrastructure with the said Institute. The Central Revenue Control laboratory, Pusa (CRCL) also refused to give a Report as they have any facility to test on those four parameters as were demanded by the department. Finally, with mutual consensus, the samples were sent to a private lab namely M/s. Don Bosco Technical Institute. The test report from M/s. Don Bosco dated 14.05.2016 reported that the goods are the aluminum plates with PS coating for printing purposes and the plates are CTCP printing plates. The report denied the plates to be violet printing plates are to be thermal printing plates. It was also reported that after testing the plates on CTCP machine, that the p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt and despite the mandate of the aforesaid both notifications vide which anti-dumping duty at the rate of 4.87 USD per square meter was imposed on the impugned goods, the same has been evaded by the respondent. 3.1 It is further submitted that sample were drawn in the presence of representatives of the importer's customs broker and were got tested through the lab as was mutually agreed by the importer. The importer was allowed to cross-examine the technical person from the said laboratory (M/s. Don Bosco). The crossexamination has also revealed that the subject goods are CTCP plates only. The Commissioner (Appeals) has wrongly relied on the aspect of the cross-examination to state that once the test was outsourced, the test report cannot be relied. Most importantly nowhere the respondent could prove that the impugned goods are not CTCP plates. Irrespective that M/s. Don Bosco has also outsourced the testing, it is also an undisputed fact on record that the subject goods are having pre sensitized coating on it. Hence not only the respondent-importer is liable to pay anti-dumping duty but is also liable to pay additional BCD as the goods which merit classification under CTH 3701. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e said notification anti-dumping duties leviable on PS plates and digital printing plates falling under Chapter 37, 76 or 84. Learned counsel has impressed upon that this clarifies that the analogue and digital plates can fall under any of the said three chapters. Applying the General Rules of Interpretation of Customs Tariff Act Rule 3(c) when the goods fall under more than one heading, it should be classified under the heading which occurs last in numerical order. Resultantly, it is chapter 8442 under which the goods imported by the respondent merit classification. With these submissions, no infirmity in the order under challenge is impressed upon and the appeal filed by the department is prayed to be dismissed. 5. Having heard both the parties at length and perusing the entire records, we observe following two issues need adjudication: (i) Whether the goods imported by the respondent-importer have rightly been reported as CTCP printing plates attracting antidumping duty in terms of Notification No. 51/2012 dated 03.12.2012 as is the case of department or the goods are the aluminum PS printing plates to which there is no anti-dumping duty liability as is the case of the respon....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....P aluminum plates covered under anti-dumping Notification No. 51/2012 dated 03.12.2012. 6.2 Irrespective of the above findings, it is coming from the show cause notice itself that another notification no. 25/2014-Cus.(ADD) dated 09.06.2014 imposes anti-dumping duty on pre sensitized aluminium plates at the rate of .22 USD per kg. The Notification No. 25/2014 dated 09.02.2014 is perused which has been issued pursuant to the review in matter of continuation of anti- dumping duty on imports of pre-sensitized positive offset aluminum plates of thickness ranging from 1.5 mm to .40 mm falling under Chapter 37, 76 or 84. Pursuant to the findings of said review, the notification 25/2014 had extended anti-dumping duty on PS aluminum plates originating in or exported from China PR at the rate of .22 per USD per kg for a period of 5 years. It becomes clear that though the plates imported by the respondent are not proved to be CTCP aluminum plates but these admittedly are pre sensitized aluminum plates against which also there is an imposition of anti dumping duty w.e.f. 10.03.2014 till 09.03.2019. The impugned Bill of Entry is of February, 2015. Hence it stands clear that the respondentimpor....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er Rule 1 of General Rules of Interpretation the Tariff Heading of goods is to be ascertained on the basis of terms of heading of relevant sections and the chapter notes. The rules further state that in case the goods are not classified under rule 1 subsequent rules has to be sequentially followed. We observe that Commissioner (Appeals) has jumped upon Rule 3(C) of GIR which is not acceptable. While going through the Chapter notes and explanatory notes of 8442 no doubt 84425020 include plates, cylinders and other printing components prepared for printing purposes but there has been an exclusion clause to this section note according to which the sensitized plates (consisting of metal or plastics, coated with a sensitized photographic emulsion or of a sheet of photo sensitive plastic, whether or not affixed to a support of metal of other material) are excluded. There is no denial to the fact that the imported aluminum plates are sensitized plates. Hence, the plates are excluded from Chapter 8442. Otherwise also, as already observed above 8442 mainly talks about equipments and machines for preparation of printing plates whereas CTH 3701 talks specifically about photographic printing p....