9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (5) TMI 1175 - AT - CustomsBenefit of N/N. 6/2006-CE dated 01.03.2006 - import of Hard disc drives - whether the appellant-importer are eligible for a concessional rate of duty of customs or otherwise? - Held that - In the case of Fortune Marketing and Ors. 2017 (4) TMI 1002 - CESTAT MUMBAI , it was held that the appellant importers are eligible for a concessional rate of duty of customs claimed by them for the said product under Exemption N/N. 6/2011 CE dated 01.03.2011 as amended from time to time and held that imported hard disc drives are eligible for concessional rate of duty as claimed by the Importer appellants - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Issues:
Interpretation of exemption notification No.6/2006-CE dated 01.03.2006 for imported hard disc drives. Analysis: The appeal was filed against order-in-original CAO No.CC-RS/08/2015-16 Adj (I) ACC dated 06.07.2015. The main issue revolved around whether the appellant-importer was eligible for the concessional rate of duty of customs for "hard disc drives" imported by them under exemption notification No.6/2006-CE dated 01.03.2006 as amended. The appellant's counsel argued that a similar issue had been considered by the Bench in a previous case and that the benefit of the notification should not be denied. The technical evaluation of the imported products was conducted by the Department of Electronics and Information Technology, Government of India, with conflicting views within different wings of the government. The counsel relied on a previous decision in the case of Supertron Electronics Pvt. Limited where the Tribunal had dismissed a similar appeal filed by Revenue. Upon hearing both sides and reviewing the submissions, the Tribunal referred to its decision in the case of Fortune Marketing and Ors. where it had concluded that the appellant importers were indeed eligible for the concessional rate of duty claimed for the imported hard disc drives under Exemption Notification No.6/2011 CE. Citing this precedent, the Tribunal held that the impugned order was not sustainable and set it aside, allowing the appeal with consequential relief, if any. The order was pronounced in Court on 11.04.2017.
|
