9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (6) TMI 908 - AT - CustomsClassification of coal - Classification under CTH 2701 1920 or under CTH 2701 12 00 - Steam coal or bituminous coal - Held that - Since the very same issue has already come up before the Tribunal and this Tribunal 2014 (8) TMI 246 - CESTAT BANGALORE in the case of Coastal Energy Pvt Ltd and Others, upheld the demand for differential duty, we consider that it would be appropriate to decide this appeal also finally. Accordingly the requirement of pre-deposit is dispensed with and appeal itself is disposed of by confirming the demand for differential duty with interest - However, penalty is set aside - Decided partly in favour of assessee.
Issues: Classification of imported coal under CTH 2701 1920 as "Steam Coal" for exemption under Notification No.12/2012 Cus. dated 17.03.2012 vs. classification as Bituminous coal under CTH 2701 12 00 for duty liability.
Classification Issue: The case involved the classification of 18,000 MTs of imported coal by the Appellant under CTH 2701 1920 as "Steam Coal" to claim exemption under Notification No.12/2012 Cus. dated 17.03.2012. However, it was contended that the calorific value and volatile matter content of the coal indicated it should be classified as Bituminous coal under CTH 2701 12 00, attracting duty liability under Sl. No. 124 of the notification. The Tribunal noted the previous decision in the case of Coastal Energy Pvt Ltd and Others, where a similar issue was upheld, leading to the confirmation of the demand for differential duty in the present appeal. Legal Decision: Despite a stay application being listed, the Tribunal decided to proceed with the appeal, considering the similarity of the issue with the previous case. The requirement of pre-deposit was waived, and the appeal was disposed of by confirming the demand for differential duty with interest. Notably, following the precedent set in the earlier case, no penalty was imposed on the Appellant in the current judgment. This comprehensive analysis highlights the core issue of classification of imported coal and the Tribunal's decision based on the interpretation of relevant provisions and past rulings. The judgment provides clarity on the classification criteria and the implications for duty liability, showcasing the importance of legal precedents in determining such matters.
|
