TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (3) TMI 637
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nthetic Casting Tapes' under the brand name 'Articast'. Admittedly, the importer was claiming the classification of the imported goods under CTH 9021. 2. The DRI, Ahmedabad appears to have gathered information that the goods under dispute were appropriately classifiable under CTH 30059040 and that the classification adopted by the importer - Appellant was incorrect, which resulted in the issuance of a summons to the importer- Appellant. Thereafter, it appears that the statement of Shri Ramesh S. Ghodge, Managing Director of the Appellant was recorded and vide SCN dated 29.07.2010 it was proposed inter alia to re-classify the imported goods in question under CTH30059040, demand applicable duty along with interest and penalty. It appears t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ue to accidents or injuries related to fractured bones could be treated by this product. It is claimed that the period under dispute was clearly prior to the self-assessment regime. Ld. Advocate however, fairly admitted that in respect of similar imports, various Benches of CESTAT have confirmed the classification as proposed by the Revenue, as bandages. He would, however, submit that extended period of limitation under Section 28(4) of the Customs Act, 1962 was not invocable since there was no question of collusion or wilful misstatement or suppression of any facts by the importer; that CTH9021 covering specialised equipment was only claimed under a bona fide belief. He would thus contend that suppression has been alleged to invoke larger ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng the same was a sufficient reason for the Revenue to invoke the extended period of limitation which has been done in the case of hand. He would thus request for upholding the impugned order in Toto. 6. After going through the Orders - supra of co-ordinate Benches, we find that the issue involved in the present appeal is no more res-integra. The relevant portion of the order in Johnson & Johnson [supra] reads as under: "The above appeal arises out of the order of Collector of Customs (Appeals), Bombay upholding the Assistant Collector's order classifying "Deltalite Casting Tapes" imported by the appellants herein under sub--heading 3005.10 of the Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, rejecting the importers' claim for class....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s not for retail sale, are excluded, according to the HSN Explanatory Notes to Heading 30.05 at page 439--440 of Vol. II and hence even though the goods in question have not been determined to be covered/coated with pharmaceutical substance, they would still remain under Heading 30.05. The claim of the importers that the goods are orthopaedic appliances/splint for fracture application and hence covered as fracture appliances under Heading 9021.19 is not tenable, since the goods are different from splints for orthosis and are different from the type of goods covered in terms of HSN Explanatory Notes to Heading 90.21 at page 1498 of Vol. IV, which states under the Heading "splints and other fracture appliances", that some articles designed fo....