2013 (11) TMI 886 - AT - Customs

Classification of goods - Import of telegraphic message addressed to Mahatma Gandhi, New Delhi with certain scribbling in hand on the message - Classification under Customs Tariff Item 49021010 or CTI 97050090 - Confiscation of goods - Held that - There is no definition of the expression historical interest in Customs Act, Customs Tariff Act or Import Policy. Neither is the expression defined in Antiquities and Art Treasures Act, 1972. This Act only uses the expression to give an inclusive definition of antiquity. Antiquity is defined to include any manuscript of historical value which has been in existence for more than 75 years. This definition cannot be interpreted to mean that manuscripts which are not antiquity cannot be of historical interest - To be classified under Customs Tariff Heading 9705 an item need not be an item of antiquity. In fact antiquity is classifiable under Heading 9706 - To be classified under this heading an item need not be an item of antiquity. In fact antiquity is classifiable under Heading 9706 - Commissioner (Appeal), the impugned sheet of paper commands a price of US 2074 only for the historical interest in the paper and we do not find anything wrong with the finding of the Commissioner (Appeal) that the item is of historical interest and hence classifiable under CTI 97050090. Once the goods are classified under the said tariff item goods imported without licence is liable to confiscation and the person importing the goods is liable to pay penalty.

Summary

Issues: Classification of imported goods under Customs Tariff, Historical interest vs. Antiquity, Applicability of Customs Act and Antiquities and Art Treasures Act, 1972, Penalty imposition under Customs Act.

In this case, the appellant imported a telegraphic message addressed to "Mahatma Gandhi, New Delhi" with scribbling on it, declared as a "printed/handwritten letter of Mahatma Gandhi" valued at US$ 2,074. The Customs department classified the goods under CTI 97050090 due to historical interest, requiring an import license, leading to confiscation under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962. A redemption fine of Rs. 25,000 and a penalty of Rs. 15,000 were imposed. The appellant appealed, arguing the message was not an antiquity as per the Antiquities and Art Treasures Act, 1972, and should be classified under CTI 49021010 without fine and penalty.

The appellant contended that since the New Delhi telegraphic office was established in 1931, the message postdates this year and is not an antiquity, as per the Act's definition. The Archaeological Survey of India confirmed it was not an antiquity, and the term "historical interest" lacked a defined meaning in relevant laws. The appellant argued that only items covered by the Antiquities and Art Treasures Act could be deemed of historical interest, thus the message should not be classified under CTI 97050090.

The Tribunal noted the absence of a defined term for "historical interest" in the Customs Act, Customs Tariff Act, or Import Policy, and the Antiquities and Art Treasures Act, 1972 used it inclusively for defining antiquities. The Act considers antiquities as items existing for over 75 years, but this does not preclude non-antiquities from being of historical interest. Customs Tariff Heading 9705 includes items of historical interest, not limited to antiquities classified under Heading 9706.

The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeal)'s decision, stating that the message's value of US$ 2074 was primarily due to its historical interest, justifying classification under CTI 97050090. The imposed fine and penalty of Rs. 5,000 each were deemed reasonable. Consequently, the appeal was rejected, affirming the order of the Commissioner (Appeal) without interference.