2004 (3) TMI 517 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues: Classification of imported goods under ITC (HS), requirement of specific license for import

The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai involved the classification of imported Electronic White Boards and Electronic Print Boards under ITC (HS) and the requirement of a specific license for their import. The appellant imported the goods and filed a Bill of Entry for clearance, claiming that the goods should be allowed to clear under SIL as they were listed against Sr. No. 69 of Appendix XXXV of Import/Export Policy before 25-3-1996. However, the goods fell under ITC (HS) classification 8472900.90, which required a specific license for import, as per the department's contention. The appellant argued that the goods should be classified under 8543.90 and not 8472.90, but this plea was not raised before the lower appellate authority. The lower appellate authority classified the goods under Chapter Heading 8472.90, which necessitated an import license, leading to the rejection of the appeal by the Tribunal.

In the first issue of classification under ITC (HS), the appellant contended that the goods should be classified under 8543.90 instead of 8472.90 as done by the Customs authorities. However, this argument was not presented before the lower appellate authority. The Tribunal noted that the goods were classified under Chapter Heading 8472.90, applicable to other office equipment, with the corresponding entry in ITC HS being 84729009.90, requiring an import license. Since the appellant did not possess the necessary license, the classification under 8472.90 was upheld, indicating that the goods fell under the category necessitating a specific license for import.

Regarding the requirement of a specific license for import, the appellant's claim to clear the goods under SIL based on their previous listing in the Import/Export Policy was countered by the department's assertion that the goods fell under ITC (HS) classification 8472900.90, which mandated a specific license for import. The Tribunal found no fault in the lower appellate authority's decision, affirming that the goods indeed required a specific license for import, and since the appellant lacked the requisite license, the goods were liable to confiscation. Consequently, the appeal was rejected, emphasizing the importance of complying with the specific licensing requirements for the import of goods falling under certain classifications under ITC (HS).