2017 (8) TMI 628 - AT - Customs

Benefit of Concessional rate of duty - N/N. 21/2002 - imported SPECO Asphalt Mixing Plant Model - The original authority observed that the catalogue from the supplier did not have any indication that the mixing plant is with the bag type filters and therefore held that the conditions of the notification are not fulfilled for which the benefit of concessional rate of duty cannot be allowed - whether the goods imported as such would form to the description mentioned in Sl. No. 230 and that too only to the effect that whether it would confirm the bag type filter arrangements? - interpretation of statute - Held that - The respondents have imported filter bags and the adjudicating authority had denied the benefit holding that since the housing has been imported by them it cannot be called as bag filter arrangement. The Commissioner (Appeals) has discussed in detail with regard to the meaning of the word Arrangement and how such word as to be interpreted when used along with the words bag filter arrangements - In the impugned order the Commissioner (Appeals) has expressed his view that when the plant/machinery are imported for road construction activity and put to use by actual user denial of the benefit on the sole ground that the housing for the filters are not imported does not keep with the purpose of interpretation of the notification - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
Department's appeal against the Commissioner (Appeals) order granting benefit of Notification No. 21/2002 to the respondents importing Asphalt Mixing Plant.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Interpretation of Notification No. 21/2002
The department contended that the respondents did not import the specified bag type filter arrangement as required by Sl. No. 230 of the Notification. They argued that the filter assembly was procured locally, not fulfilling the conditions for concessional duty. However, the respondents argued that the imported filter bags were part of the consignment, satisfying the requirement. The Commissioner (Appeals) analyzed the issue and held that the respondents were eligible for the benefit of the notification, emphasizing that the housing for the filter bags being procured locally did not disqualify them. The Tribunal agreed, stating that the purpose of the notification was not defeated by the non-import of housing alone.

Issue 2: Meaning of "Bag Type Filter Arrangements"
The Tribunal examined whether the import of filter bags alone constituted compliance with the requirement of "bag type filter arrangements" as per the Notification. The Commissioner (Appeals) extensively discussed the meaning of "arrangement" in the context of the notification. It was concluded that the import of filter bags, even if the housing was procured locally, aligned with the intended purpose of the notification for road construction activity. The Tribunal upheld this interpretation, citing previous judgments emphasizing the practical use of the imported goods.

Final Decision:
After thorough deliberation, the Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) order, dismissing the department's appeal as lacking merit. The Tribunal found no grounds to diverge from the interpretation provided by the Commissioner (Appeals) regarding the eligibility of the respondents for the benefit of Notification No. 21/2002. The cross-objection was also disposed of accordingly.