2008 (8) TMI 269 - AT - Customs

Respondents imported CD Pick up lens unit and optical pick up assembly and cleared them after furnishing a certificate given by Central Excise authorities in terms of procedure set out in the Customs (Import of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty for Manufacture of Excisable Goods) Rules, 1996 - respondents has received not only the impugned goods but also procured materials like CD loader tray, CD Loader base, micro motor, wires, cables and screws etc. and assembled the complete CD deck mechanism - Held that what they had imported were only parts and therefore, they were eligible for exemption under notification No. 25/99

Summary

Issues:
1. Dispute over the nature of imported items - whether they constitute parts or a complete CD Deck mechanism.
2. Eligibility of the respondent for exemption under Notification No. 25/99.

Analysis:
1. The dispute in this case revolved around the nature of the imported items, specifically whether they should be classified as parts or a complete CD Deck mechanism. The Customs authorities contended that the imported items were a complete CD Deck mechanism, while the importer claimed they were parts. The Commissioner (Appeals) ruled in favor of the importer, stating that they were eligible for the benefit of the Notification.

2. The Tribunal directed the Departmental Representative to produce original clearance documents to verify if the importer had paid the duty under protest while claiming the benefit of Notification No. 25/99. The documents indicated that the duty had indeed been paid under protest, supporting the importer's claim for exemption.

3. The Tribunal further examined a report on the utilization of the imported goods in the factory. The report confirmed that the imported goods, along with other materials like CD loader tray, base, micro motor, wires, cables, and screws, were used to assemble the complete CD Deck mechanism. Based on this evidence, the Tribunal concluded that the imported items were indeed parts and not a complete mechanism.

4. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) decision, ruling in favor of the importer's eligibility for exemption under Notification No. 25/99. The appeal filed by the Department was rejected on the grounds that the imported items were considered parts and not a complete CD Deck mechanism, making the importer eligible for the exemption.

5. In conclusion, the Tribunal's detailed analysis of the facts and the nature of the imported goods led to the rejection of the Department's appeal and upheld the decision in favor of the importer, emphasizing their eligibility for the exemption under Notification No. 25/99. The judgment highlights the importance of proper classification and documentation in customs matters to determine eligibility for duty exemptions.