2017 (5) TMI 736 - AT - Customs

Import of Witlink 2000 system including IDU 2002 S/N PIN 22161 ODU4-1-1-13/ODU 4-1-3-13 with frequency of 13 GHz - notification provides exemption applicable for Base Transreceiver Stations - benefit of N/N. 21/2002-Cus. (serial No.239) applicable or not? - Held that - The goods as declared by them, were subjected to examination by the Department of Telecommunications, Government of India and vide letter No.TBVV/F/VAS-GEN/01.TEC/05 dated 31.5.2005 specifically stated that the goods imported do not seem to be Cellular Repeater or Router. The benefit of N/N. 21/2002 (serial No.239) is only for Cellular Repeater or Router - benefit not applicable. Confiscation of goods - Held that - the goods which were cleared earlier were cleared on final assessment of the bills of entry and the goods are not available for confiscation. In the absence of any goods, the adjudicating authority was correct in not confiscating the said goods - claim of Revenue rejected. Appeal dismissed - decided against appellant-importer and also against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against order-in-original regarding benefit of exemption Notification No.21/2002-Cus. (serial No.239) for Base Transreceiver Stations.

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to multiple appeals against order-in-original No.CC-(SP)-16/2006/ACC (ADJ) dated 3.10.2006. The issue revolves around the eligibility for the benefit of exemption under Notification No.21/2002-Cus. (serial No.239) for Base Transreceiver Stations. The appellant imported a specific system, and it was found during examination that the goods did not qualify for the exemption. A show cause notice was issued, leading to a demand for differential duty, confiscation of goods, and imposition of penalties. Both the appellant-importer and an individual contested the notice. The adjudicating authority upheld the demand, leading to appeals from both parties. The Revenue also appealed, disagreeing with the non-confiscation of previously cleared goods by the importer.

Upon review, it was established that the goods imported were not Cellular Repeater or Router, which are the only items eligible for the exemption under Notification No.21/2002. The Department of Telecommunications confirmed that the goods did not meet the criteria. As there was no technical data supporting the importer's claim, the appeals from the importer and the individual were dismissed due to lack of merit.

Regarding the Revenue's appeal, it contested the non-confiscation of previously cleared goods. However, the adjudicating authority correctly noted that the earlier cleared goods had undergone final assessment and were not available for confiscation. Therefore, the appeal from the Revenue was also rejected. In conclusion, all appeals – from the appellant-importer, the individual, and the Revenue – were dismissed.

This detailed analysis highlights the core issue of exemption eligibility under Notification No.21/2002-Cus. and the subsequent findings leading to the dismissal of all appeals.