TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (3) TMI 695
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ischarged at 18%. After due process of law, the Ld. Adjudicating Authority confirmed the demand along with interest and imposed penalty. In appeal, the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the differential demand but however set aside the penalty. Hence this appeal against the duty and interest demanded. 3. Shri Rohan Muralidharan Aravindh, learned counsel appeared for the M/s Flextronics and Shri Anoop Singh, learned Authorized Representative appeared for Revenue. 3.1 The Ld. Advocate for the appellant submitted as follows : (A) The Subject Goods are chargeable to IGST @ 12% as per Sl. No. 203 of Schedule II to Notification NO. 01/2017 - IT (RATE) - It is not disputed that the imported goods are lithium-ion batteries meant for use in cellular mobile phones. The subject goods viz., lithium-ion batteries are integral 'parts' of cellular mobiles without which the mobile phones are incomplete and cannot function. The Ld Advocate stated that S. No. 203 is a more specific heading as lithium-ion batteries used for the manufacture of cell phones is more specific when compared to an entry which covers all lithium-ion batteries which may be for multiple uses such as motor vehicl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....missions made encapsulated the rates prevalent at different times as per a table which is given below. The period under dispute is from 26.7.2018 to 31.8.2018 IGST - Rate Schedule Period S. No. 203 (12%) S. No. 376AA (18%) S. No. 139 (28%) Prior to 26.07.2018 Parts for manufacture of Telephones for cellular networks or for other wireless networks Was not inserted Electric accumulators, including separators therefor, whether or not rectangular (including square) From 26.07.2018 to 31.03.2020 Parts for manufacture of Telephones for cellular networks or for other wireless networks Lithium-ion Batteries Electric accumulators, including separators therefor, whether or not rectangular (including square) other than Lithium-ion battery and other Lithium-ion accumulators including Lithium-ion power banks Post 31.03.2020 Omitted Lithium-ion Batteries Electric accumulators, including separators therefor, whether or not rectangular (including square) other than Lithium-ion battery and other Lithium-ion accumulators including Lithium-ion power banks IGST rate applicable to Lithium ion batteries. 4.1 It is the appellants contention that; ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pellant has diverse business interest ranging from manufacture, export, trading of electronic equipments and automotive parts. The appellant has not declared anything about the end use of the batteries at the time of assessment. Neither have they resorted to first check or provisional assessment to resolve any imminent dispute pertaining to IGST rates and description etc. e) It has been held by Higher judicial forums that the Courts shall reject that construction which will defeat the plain intention of the Legislature even though there may be some inexactitude in the language used. The Courts, ae very reluctant to hold that the Parliament has achieved nothing by the language it used when it is tolerably plain what it seeks to achieve. Lithium-ion batteries are likely to be a part or accessory of some machine or equipment, it cannot be the legislative intent that by classifying the impugned goods as per the main equipment or machine S. No. 376AA of Schedule III to Notification No. 01/2017 - IT (Rate), as inserted by Notification No. 19/2018-IT (Rate) dated 26.7.2018 become redundant. 4.3 We find that; a) Goods should be classified based on their description and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....parties stand to the dispute for arriving at a decision, are in the nature of "material facts". The material facts on which the party relies for his claim ie facta probanda must be stated in their averments before the Original Authority. Since the object and purpose is to enable the opposite party to know the case he has to meet with. In the absence of pleading, a party cannot be allowed to project facts that have a major bearing on the dispute to have been accepted, unless specifically expressed by the parties in no uncertain terms. Even a stray line in an order cannot be seen as being conclusive of a fact if the material fact was not raised before the Original Authority and tested through discussion. This is because of the inability of words to always achieve precision and language being an inadequate vehicle of thought. Sometimes words unwittingly convey more than what one meant. As stated by the Hon'ble Justice O. Chinnappa Reddy, in Girdhari Lal & sons Vs Balbir Nath Mathur [(1986) 2 SCC 237],: "6. . . . Words are but mere vehicles of thought. They are meant to express or convey one's thoughts. Generally, a person's words and thoughts are coincidental. No problem aris....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ken on face value. If the appellant had felt this to be an important question of fact and law, having a bearing on the rate of IGST to be discharged, they should have raised the matter upfront and had the matter decided by the Original Authority without trying to pass it off as an undisputed matter. i) Even otherwise, S. No. 376AA of Schedule III Notification No. 19/2018-IT (Rate) dated 26.7.2018 covers lithium-ion batteries classified under CTH 8507 6000. There is no special carve out for lithium-ion batteries that are parts of cellular phones as done in the case of S. No. 139 shown at the table at para 4 above. j) The Appellant has averred that S. No. 203 is a more specific heading, as lithium-ion batteries used for the manufacture of cell phones is more specific when compared to an entry which covers all lithium-ion batteries which may be for multiple uses such as motor vehicles, electronics, power tools etc. Even going by the appellant claim of 'parts', we find that "Lithium-Ion Batteries" is the genus (specific heading) and "parts of cellular phones" are, if at all, an indistinct species (residuary heading), thereof. Hence this averment of the appellant has n....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ication is resorted to only when there is some ambiguity in the words or expression used, which is not so the case here. Their averments have however been examined in detail above and will be again done separately below, while discussing the issues raised along with various supportive judgments cited by the appellant in their favour. The duty rate notifications for Customs and for IGST purposes are not in pari materia and the description of goods in a customs notification will not help decide the matter either way. It has also been recorded in the impugned order that the appellant has started paying 18% duty from the month of August. Judgments 5. We now examine the judgments stated by the appellant; (A1) The appellant has stated that, lithium-ion batteries are integral 'parts' of cellular mobiles without which the mobile phones are incomplete and cannot function. Reference in this regard was made to the decision of the Hon'ble Tribunal in the case of Jas Telecom [2019 (369) E.L.T. 1515 (Tri. - Bang.)] Further, various decisions have ruled that a part is an essential component of the whole without which the whole cannot function. Reliance in this regard was placed on ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uch rulings do not have any precedential value. As pointed out by Revenue the Advance Ruling is not related to the facts of the case as it relates to the description 'Battery of Mobile Handsets' and not 'Lithium Ion Battery'. An advance Ruling is a private tax ruling and cannot formally be cited as an authority by another taxpayer / appellant in their own judicial proceedings. Each Ruling is an authority in the setting of its own facts and will not help advance other appellants cause in their case before judicial fora. (B1) The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai, in the case of Assistant Director Of Income Tax vs Green Emirate Shipping And Travels [(2006) 100 ITD 203 (MUM) / [2006] 286 ITR 60 (MUM)], after referring to the Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment in Union Of India And Anr vs Azadi Bachao Andolan And Anr [AIR 2004 SUPREME COURT 1107], held that the Authority for Advance Rulings, not being a part of the judicial hierarchy, cannot lay down a binding precedent for anyone - the Revenue, the assessees or the appellate authorities. (C) The appellant has stated that The Principle of Contemporaneous Expositio states that a statute must be constructed or interp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ctional machine performing several complementary or alternative functions, was to be done by the rules of interpretation based on its essential function and Chapter Notes. In Bhavnagar University Vs Palitana Sugar Mills Pvt. Ltd. [2003 (2) SCC 111], the Apex Court observed that, "It is well settled that a little difference in facts or additional facts may make a lot of difference in the precedential value of a decision". The facts being distinguished, the ratio in JMK Energy (supra) is hence not applicable. No Interest or Penalty is leviable in the absence of machinery provision 6. The Appellant submits that IGST is levied under Section 3(7) of CTA. However, the CTA has limited provisions, and it borrows various provisions from the Customs Act for implementation of its provisions. Section 3(12) of the CTA, which is the borrowing provision with regard to IGST, did not borrow provisions of interest from the Customs Act. Therefore, it is submitted that interest cannot be recovered for non-payment of IGST which is chargeable under Section 3 of the CTA. 6.1 Section 3(12) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, as it stood just prior to the Finance (No 2) Act 2024 been notified on 16th....