TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (1) TMI 1495
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of basic customs duty in terms of Sl No. 966(I) of Notification No. 46/2011-Cus dated 01.06.2011 against the certificates of origin issued by the Department of Foreign Trade, Government of Thailand was claimed. However, on the basis of doubt about the true origin of goods, the department asked to provide information/documents for verification of origin of goods by invoking Rule 16(b) of Annexure-III to the Notification No. 189/2009-Cus. dated 31.12.2009 read with Section 17(3) of Customs Act, 1962. The reply to the said information/questionnaire was alleged incomplete. Accordingly, goods were held not eligible for benefit of Notification No. 46/2011 dated 01.06.2011 vide Order-in-Original dated 16.11.2017 (in Appeal No. C/50045/2023) and Order-in-Original dated 04.07.2018 (in Appeal No. C/50046/2023). The impugned both the Bills of Entry were ordered reassessment without extending exemption benefit. Being aggrieved of both the Orders-in-Original, the appellant filed appeals before Commissioner of Customs (Appeals). Both the appeals have been rejected by the common order of Commissioner (Appeals) bearing No. 1483-1484/2020-21 dated 22.02.2021. Being aggrieved, the appellant is befor....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nial of benefit of preferential rate without following the rules simply on the basis that importer did not provide requisite information is absolutely arbitrary and uncalled for. Learned counsel has relied upon the decision in the case of Commissioner of Customs, Tuticorin Vs. Sterlite Industreis (India) Ltd. reported as 2015 (317) ELT 482 (Tri.-Chennai) 3.3 It is finally submitted that the onus of proving the origin of goods at the first point of query was always been the government of the issuing country. It is only w.e.f. 27.03.2020 vide which Section 28DA was introduced along with Customs (Administration of Rules of Origin under Trade Agreements) Rules 2020, according to which first point of query is the importer. However, despite the said shift the proper officer is still required to conduct the verification as per the trade agreement and the respective rules. Otherwise also CAROTAR, 2020 prescribes for seeking such information only as given in Form 1 to those rules. Learned counsel submitted that said Form 1 also does not require the importer to possess such information as was sought by the department in the questionnaire issued to the appellant. With these submissions, th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e (Determination of Origin of Goods under the Preferential Trade Agreement between the Governments of Member States of the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) and the Republic of India) Rules, 2009, Annexure III thereof provides operational certification procedures for 2009, Rules on issuance of verification of AIFTA certificate of origin and the other related administrative matters. Rule 1 thereof requires that Certificate of Origin shall be issued by the government authorities (the issuing authority) of the exporting party. In the present case, admittedly the exporting party is country of Thailand and the government of Thailand has issued a certificate of origin. Admittedly, the said certificate has been produced by the appellant along with all requisite import documents including invoices, packing lists, etc. 5.2 Further perusal of the Notification shows that such benefit is available to the importer if the importer proves to the satisfaction of the Deputy Commissioner or Assistant Commissioner of Customs, or as the case may be, that the goods in respect of which the benefit of this exemption is claimed are of the origin from the countries as mentioned in Appendix....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....original AIFTA Certificate of Origin shall be returned to the Issuing Authority within a reasonable period but not to exceed two months. The Issuing Authority shall be duly notified of the grounds for the denial of preferential tariff treatment. (d) In cases where an AIFTA Certificate of Origin is not accepted, as stated in paragraph (c), the Issuing Authority shall provide detailed, exhaustive clarification addressing the grounds for the denial of preferential tariff treatment raised by the importing party. The Customs Authority of the importing party shall accept the AIFTA Certificate of Origin and grant the preferential tariff treatment if the clarification is found satisfactory." 5.4 Apparently and admittedly, the Customs Authority while verifying the origin of goods had issued a questionnaire and denied the benefit on the ground that the complete questionnaire was not answered by the appellant creating a doubt about the Country of origin Certificate. The perusal of the condition No. 7 (c), as above makes it clear that in case of such doubt about the authenticity of Country of origin Certificate i.e. in case where the certificate of origin is not acceptable to the C....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Authority could not have gone beyond the provisions of Notification. 5.6 I finally observe that the impugned Notification is a kind of preferential trade arrangement between States of Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and the Republic of India in order to facilitate free movement of trade. If the exemption sought under the applicable rules is denied on one or the other pretext that too based merely on assumptions and presumptions, it will hamper the free movement of trade between agreeing nations. Same is highly uncalled for and would rather render the entire exemption Notification otiose more so when on the face of the record, the Certificate of Origin is otherwise not disputed. Above all, the substantial benefit as that of exemption from payment of duty shall not be denied merely based on procedural lapse. The identical issue has already been decided by this Tribunal in the case of MJ gold Pvt Ltd. Vs. Principal Commissioner of Customs (Import), New Delhi reported as 2022 (10) TMI 292 Tri. (Del.) 5.7 From the impugned order, it is observed to be an admitted fact that undisputed certificate of country of origin is on record and the goods were direct consignm....