9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (9) TMI 354 - AT - CustomsAdditional Duty - Notification No. 167/1986 - Rectification of Mistake - Whether the appellant was liable to pay additional duty in respect of a vessel brought in by them for breaking up in terms of the provisions of the Custom Tariff Act, 1975 - The appellant had claimed general exemption under Notification No.167/1986 for exemption from CVD on the vessel imported for breaking - Held that - The appellant was eligible for the benefit of Notification No.167/1986 needed to be allowed to that extent - Following the judgement of ENGEE INDUSTRIAL SERVICES (P) LTD. Versus UNION OF INDIA 2003 (5) TMI 458 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT - the actual product imported was a ship and therefore whether the product got from it was exempted from Central Excise or not was of no consequence. By Notification No. 167/86-C.E. the Central Government, had exempted goods falling under Chapter 89 from the whole of the levy of excise where no operation was carried on in or in relation to the manufacture of the said goods with the aid of power - The vessels imported by the appellant were not seaworthy and they were admittedly for the purpose of breaking - There was a separate entry for this purpose both under the Customs Tariff Act and Central Tariff Act - The product actually imported was the material that can be retrieved from the ship - the structure by itself was of no value and the appellant subjects the vessel to a process to retrieve the material from the structure without the use of power - appeal was allowed to the extent it was challenging the imposition of CVD and not extending the benefit of Notification No.167/1986 to the appellant-applicant - The application for rectification of mistake was disposed off Decided in favor of Assessee.
Issues Involved:
1. Rectification of error in the Final Order dated 06.08.2012. 2. Consideration of submissions regarding Appeal No. C/01/2008. 3. Eligibility for exemption from Additional Duty of Customs (CVD) under Notification No. 167/1986. 4. Applicability of the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Engee Industrial Services Pvt. Ltd. Detailed Analysis: 1. Rectification of Error in the Final Order dated 06.08.2012: The appellant filed an application for rectification of an error apparent on the face of the record in the Final Order No. A/1139-1140/WZB/AHD/2012, dated 06.08.2012. The appellant contended that the findings recorded in the order did not address Appeal No. C/01/2008, which pertained to the duty liability of Additional Duty of Customs (CVD). Both sides agreed that there was an error as no findings were recorded on this issue. 2. Consideration of Submissions Regarding Appeal No. C/01/2008: Upon review, it was found that the Final Order dated 06.08.2012 did not consider the submissions made in respect of Appeal No. C/01/2008, which challenged the imposition of CVD on the vessel M.V. Jagat Priya imported for breaking. The appellant had argued for exemption from CVD under Notification No. 167/1986, which was not considered in the original order. 3. Eligibility for Exemption from Additional Duty of Customs (CVD) under Notification No. 167/1986: The appellant had filed a Bill of Entry dated 10.05.1993, seeking exemption from CVD under Notification No. 167/1986. The adjudicating authority disallowed this benefit, and the first appellate authority upheld this decision, citing technical grounds. The appellant argued that the ship-breaking industry operates without the aid of power, making them eligible for the exemption. The judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Engee Industrial Services Pvt. Ltd. was cited to support this claim. 4. Applicability of the Judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the Case of Engee Industrial Services Pvt. Ltd.: The Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka had addressed a similar issue, ruling that vessels imported for breaking, where no power is used, are exempt from additional duty under Notification No. 167/1986. The court held that the exemption applies if the ship-breaking process does not involve the use of power. This judgment was binding and applicable to the present case. Conclusion: The Tribunal found that the appellant had consistently claimed the benefit of Notification No. 167/1986 for exemption from CVD. The judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Engee Industrial Services Pvt. Ltd. was directly relevant and binding. Consequently, the Tribunal rectified the error in the Final Order dated 06.08.2012, allowing the appeal to the extent it challenged the imposition of CVD and granting the exemption under Notification No. 167/1986. The order-in-appeal No. 99/JMN/2007, dated 26.10.2007, was set aside, and the application for rectification of mistake was disposed of accordingly.
|
