TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (7) TMI 1207
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the goods under Customs Tariff Item No. 76109010 claiming exemption benefit under Notification No. 152/2009-Customs SI. No. 610 as amended by Notification No.66/2016-Customs dated 31.12.2016 and submitted (under e-Sanchit) certificate of Country of Origin issued by the Korean Chamber of Commerce and Industries. The importer paid IGST @18% by classifying the goods imported under SL No.-271 of Schedule - III of IGST Notification 01/2017 dated 28.06.2017. The Department challenged the declared classification under Tariff 76109010 of the imported goods covered under the said Bills of Entry and has claimed that the same is appropriately classifiable under Tariff 84806000 and eligible for Duty exemption benefit under Sl.No.780 instead of SI. No.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d duty demand is as per the following Table: Sl. No. CESTAT Custom Appeal No. Order in Appeal Bill of Entry Custom Duty Social Welfare Charge IGST Custom Demand [In INR] 1 C/75885/2023DB (IEC - 0209009764) KOL/CUS.PORT/KS/349/2023 dated 02-05-2023 Bill of Entry No. 9354946 dated 21-12- 2018 Bill of Entry No. 9582349 dated 09-01- 2019 0% 10% 18% 28,92,087 2 C/75630/2020DB (IEC - 0209009764) KOL/CUS(PORT)/AKR/614/2020 dated 23-09-2020 Bill of Entry No. 5189956 dated 05-10- 2019 0% 10% 18% 18,62,592 3 C/75631/2020 (IEC - 0209009764) ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....antly made of aluminium consisting of aluminium panels, it would be covered under Tariff Heading 7610 which also covers parts of structures. 2.6 It is further submitted that the issue is no more res integra. The very same issue has been taken up by the Kolkata Bench in the case of Alcove Construction Private Limited Vs Commissioner of Customs (Port) [Appeal No.766061/22023]. The Tribunal vide Final Order No.76984/2024 dated 12.09.2024, held that the goods in question would be classifiable under CTH 76109010 and not under CTH 84806000, as has been held by the Revenue. 2.7 On an identical issue, the Hyderabad Tribunal in the case of Vijay Nirman Co. Ltd Vs Principal Commissioner of Customs, Vishakapatnam [Appeal No.C/30237/2021] vide Fi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing or pit-propping, the same would get classified under heading 76.10 only. Therefore, we hold that the appellant was correct in classifying the impugned goods under CTH 7610 90 10. 7. Subsequently an identical issue also reached the Hyderabad Tribunal in the case of Vijay Nirman Co. Ltd Vs Principal Commissioner of Customs, Vishakapatnam [Appeal No.C/30237/2021] vide Final Order No.A/30009/2025 dated 13.01.2025, wherein it has been held as under: 18. It could be seen that the department is proposing that these are more in the nature of moulds for mineral materials. On perusal of HSN explanatory note (f) to CTH 8480, it would be seen that it covers (i) moulds for ceramic pastes (e.g., brick moulds, moulds for pipes or ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e concrete gets set and immovable structures like houses, building, etc., emerge. 19. On the other hand, CTH 7610 covers, inter alia, all kinds of aluminium structure except for the exclusion provided, i.e., mould falling under Chapter 84. Therefore, even if there is a mould made out of 100% aluminium also, it would be not classifiable under CTH 7610 and it will be falling under Chapter 84. However, when the product itself is not a mould then the exclusion will not be applicable. The same heading also includes aluminium plates, rods, profiles, tubes and the like, prepared for use in structures. In this case, as discussed in the foregoing paras, these goods are nothing but various aluminium plates though custom designed, which are a....