9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Classification of imported goods as Synthetic Staple Fibre of Acrylic u/s 5506.30 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 versus Acrylic Soft Waste u/s 5505.10.
The judgment pertains to the classification of imported goods as Synthetic Staple Fibre of Acrylic under sub-heading 5506.30 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 as opposed to Acrylic Soft Waste under Sub-heading 5505.10. The respondent initially filed a Bill of Entry for clearance of Acrylic soft waste, which was later found to be Acrylic Tow upon examination by Customs officers and a Committee of officers. Despite conflicting reports from various examiners, the Adjudicating authority classified the goods as Synthetic Staple Fibre of Acrylic and imposed duty and penalty. The Commissioner (Appeals) later set aside this decision, leading to an appeal by the Revenue. The Revenue's main contention was that the re-test conducted two years after importation, which was requested by the respondent, was rightly rejected by the adjudicating authority. However, upon review, it was found that the sample for re-testing was unavailable, casting doubt on the veracity of the chemical examiner's report. The Commissioner of Customs, Amritsar, acknowledged this issue and emphasized the importance of considering various reports and clarifications, including those from the Punjab Test House and a textile expert, in determining the classification of the goods as Acrylic Soft Waste. After careful consideration of the facts, including the initial examination by the Committee of officers and the failure to retest the samples as ordered, the Tribunal concurred with the Commissioner (Appeals)'s decision. The Tribunal found no reason to interfere with the order, ultimately rejecting the appeal filed by the Revenue and disposing of the cross-objection as well.
|
