TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (1) TMI 1446
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... case are that the appellant is engaged in the import of items declaring as parts of computer through Air Cargo Complex, Bangalore claiming its classification under CTH 84733099 with BCD 'NIL'. They have filed Bill of Entry No.8065856 dated 21.01.2015 and invoice dated 13.01.2015 issued by M/s. Acer Service Corporation, USA. Since the appellant had classified the said product under CTH 84733099, objection was raised by the Assessing Officer; the appellant had changed the classification and discharged duty of Rs.8,15,196/- for the past clearances from November 2013 to December 2014 voluntarily. A show-cause notice was later issued on 21.12.2015 proposing change of classification to CTH 85076000 / 85078000, recovery / appropriation of duty pa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rthern Plastic Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs & Central Excise [1998(101) ELT 549 (SC)] ii. Densons Pultretaknik Vs. CCE [2003(155) ELT 211 (SC)] iii. CC(Imports), Chennai-I Vs. GM Pens International [2009(247) ELT 159 (Mad.)] iv. Lewek Altair Shipping Pvt. Ltd. v. CC - 2019 (366) E.L.T. 318 (Tri.-Hyd.) affirmed by Supreme Court in 2019 (367) ELT A328. v. Sirthai Superware India Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, 2020 (371) E.L.T. 324 (Tri.-Mumbai) vi. Shashi Industries v. The Commissioner of Customs, Bangalore, 2024 (12) TMI 169 - CESTAT BANGALORE vii. Suntec Agri Equipment (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. The Commissioner of Customs, Bangalore, 2025 (2) TMI 752 - CESTAT BANGALORE viii. Naray....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the findings of the learned Commissioner(Appeals). He has submitted that the appellant were clearing the goods by filing Bills of Entry under Accredited Client Programme (ACP)/self-assessment which indicates that their facilitation level of clearance of goods is without assessment and examination. They are required to maintain high-levels of compliance in view of the Circular No.42/2005-Customs. This procedure has been inserted w.e.f. 01.08.2011 after making suitable amendment to various provisions of Customs Act. Self-assessment enjoins the importers to mention the correct value, classification, description of goods, exemption notifications etc. and self-assess the duty accordingly. He has referred to the judgment of this Tribunal in the c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... It is her contention that no facts have ever been suppressed from the Department nor misdeclared claiming classification under the CTH 84733099 even though the Department later concluded its classification as under CTH 85076000 / 85078000, which the appellant had accepted. 7. We find merit in the contention of the learned advocate for the appellant. On going through the sample Bill of Entry for the relevant period enclosed with the paper book, we find that the appellant had declared the description of the product as 'BT.00603.041 BTY PACK LI+6C Sanyo (Battery), (computer parts)' and the commercial invoice enclosed at page 53 of the paper book conforms to the battery reference number indicating that there is no misdeclaration as far as ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....act. Further, he has observed that nondisclosure of these facts do not support the defence of the appellant that the goods were examined and examination reports produced. 15. We find that the differential duty of Rs.93,37,120/- has been demanded, as per annexure-1 to the show cause notice for the period 18.11.2009 to 28.11.2013 for clearance of 6765 numbers of 'Engine Brush cutters' cleared against 116 Bills of Entry. The contention of the appellant is that they have placed all the necessary materials, including the catalogue of the said machines at the time of assessment. The goods were physically examined by the assessing officer and thereafter allowed to be cleared on payment of applicable duty. Since the goods were meant to be ....