2026 (3) TMI 446

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ustoms, ICD, Patparganj, wherein he decided the proposals made in the Show Cause Notice [SCN] dated 14.07.2021 covering the imports made during period 28.08.2017 to 31.05.2019. He confirmed demand of duty of customs of Rs. 1,73,58,467/- invoking the extended period of limitation under section 28(4) of the Customs Act, 1962 [Act] along with interest under section 28AA of the Act. He also imposed a penalty of equal amount under section 114A of the Act. 2. The appellant manufactures automotive wiring harness for automobiles. During the period 24.08.2017 to 31.05.2019 the appellant had imported clamps, clips, cover, stopper, brackets, protectors and adaptors made of plastic for use in manufacture of wiring harness for automobiles and classif....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hat the question of classification of these goods was already decided by the Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Chennai vs. Besmark Components Private Limited [2007 (3) TMI 50-CESTAT-Chennai] In that case Revenue's contention that these goods were classifiable under CTI 3926 90 99 was rejected by the Tribunal and the assessee's classification of the goods under CTI 8708 was upheld. He, therefore, submits that the issue is no longer res-integra and the matter may be decided accordingly. 7. We have considered the submissions by both sides and perused the records. 8. Before going into the merits of the case, we proceed to examine the invocation of extended period of limitation because if the demand is f....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f wiring harness of passenger cars. The party has clearly declared "plastic part" to take the imported goods to CTH 3926. So the party has used words in declaration to suit its own CTH declaration. 3.30 This makes the party guilty of suppression of facts. This evidence that their imported goods are not for passenger cars they could have established with proof of where these are used. It only submitted opinions and evidences of potential use, hiding the onus put on it under section XVII note 3. The classification under CTH 8708 is not based on end use but principal use as per section notes and HSN explanatory notes so the goods are classified as presented and with reference to section and chapter notes. The party itself admitted on ....