TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (4) TMI 1101
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....' imported by Appellant between October, 2018 and August, 2023 through 247 consignments was reassessed with Basic Customs Duty (BCD) @20% instead of 7.5% being assessed by Appellant, resulted in demand to the tune of Rs.1,18,93,367/- alongwith applicable interest and equal penalty by invoking extended period together with redemption fine in substitution of confiscation to the tune of Rs.1crore. Show-cause cum-demand notice was issued on dated 19.10.2023 after clearance of all goods that got confirmed in the adjudication process, is assailed in this appeal. 2. Fact of the case would go to reveal that Appellant-Importer had imported Phonac, Unitron, Hansaton make charger cases for "hearing aids" as its accessories and parts during the rele....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rther use, as could be seen from the Chapter note on 'electrical static converter' which is marked with one dash (-) under which 'battery charger' is placed with three (--) dashes but as because AC to DC converter was not part of the imported item namely charger case and there was no battery available inside the charger case also to retain charge for future use in the "hearing aids", Appellant's classification can't be disturbed since it was incumbent upon the Revenue to establish the burden of classification as settled through precedent decisions namely UOI Vs. Garware Nylons Ltd. - 1996 (87) ELT 12, Nanya Imports & Exports Enterprises Vs. CC - 2006 (197) ELT 154, H.P.L. Chemicals Ltd. Vs. CCE - 2006 (197) ELT 324. 3.1 Further submissio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....id charging case and placing reliance on the report of the Chartered Engineer, learned Counsel for the Appellant requested to disapprove the classification made by the Adjudicating Authority that resulted in consequential enhancement of duty. 4. Per contra, learned Authorised Representative for the Respondent-Department Mr. Mahesh Yashwant Patil argued in support of the reasoning and rationality of the order passed by the Commissioner of Customs and had taken us to the Catalogue of the product in question, filed alongwith appeal paper book from page No. 96 Exhibit F onwards, and particularly drawn our attention to page 98 and 113 wherein "device" has been described as Phonak Charger case Combi (BTE 2) including power supply and USB cable....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... was no dispute raised by the Adjudicating Authority that imported goods were brought to be used solely or principally with "hearing aids". Further, Appellant has demonstratively established from the description given in the Bills of Entry as well as sample invoice copy attached to the appeal paper book (one of it is as page 223 of appeal memo) that adopter of 5 Volt/1 Amp. and charger were domestically procured and not imported alongwith the disputed goods. Going by that description given in the Tariff Item for static converter having Tariff Item 8504 40, the product should have the capacity to convert electric energy, which in the instant case is from AC to DC, in addition to its capability to charge battery but as noted in the Chartered ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....opinion that it was just a medium between wall plug adopter and "hearing aids", still then on its very nature to keep the "hearing aids" inside the box for charging, it has to be classified as part and/or accessory of "hearing aids" and not a battery charger to static converter which is to be attached separately for such conversion. 6. At this point, it is also required to be placed on record that even though Catalogue of the imported goods namely charging case has shown that it has got the option of bringing charger as well as adopter plug as a combination of products that would not justify that imported goods was having all such components since Bills of Entry notes description of charger only and not the power converter, which was pro....