2017 (9) TMI 1336 - AT - Customs

Valuation of imported goods - Re-Rollable Material - mis-declaration of goods - whether classified under CTH 72044900 or under CTH 72089000? - Held that - heading 7208 requires that the width of product should be 600 mm or more to be classified under the said heading - In the instant case, it is nowhere coming out in either the examination report or the market opinions as to what is width of these cuttings. Hence, classification under this heading as has been held in the adjudication order and in the order of Commissioner (Appeals) is without any basis and hence incorrect. The reports are conflicting - the basis of classification as well as loading the value is fallacious. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues: Classification of goods under Customs Tariff, Mis-declaration, Valuation

Classification of goods under Customs Tariff:
The case involved an appeal against the classification of imported goods under the Customs Tariff. The appellant imported re-rollable material, which was classified by the Revenue under a different tariff item than declared by the importer. The Revenue sought to classify the goods under tariff item 72089000, while the importer classified them under 72044900. Market opinions were obtained, with one indicating the goods were cuttings of big sheets/plates and waste from fabricating industry suitable for re-rolling, and the other suggesting they were prime MS Plates. The tribunal found that the width of the cuttings was not specified in the examination report or market opinions, which was essential for classification under heading 7208. The tribunal concluded that the classification done by the Revenue was without basis and incorrect.

Mis-declaration:
The Revenue had charged the importer with mis-declaration of goods, leading to their re-classification and valuation at a higher rate. The appellant argued that the mis-declaration charge was not justified as the goods were cuttings with unspecified dimensions, not comparable to the Hot Rolled Sheets used for valuation. The tribunal agreed with the appellant, stating that the mis-declaration charge and re-classification were unfounded due to the lack of specific dimensions in the examination report and conflicting market opinions.

Valuation:
The valuation of the goods was enhanced based on the value of Hot Rolled Non Alloys Steel Sheets, which had specific dimensions. However, the imported goods were described as cuttings without specified dimensions, leading to conflicting reports from market opinions. The tribunal found that the enhancement of value was unjustified due to the lack of clarity in the description and dimensions of the goods. Consequently, the tribunal set aside the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) as it could not be sustained in light of the incorrect classification, mis-declaration charge, and unjustified valuation.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the issues of classification under the Customs Tariff, mis-declaration, and valuation, providing a comprehensive understanding of the tribunal's decision in the case.