9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (11) TMI 687 - AT - CustomsProject import - benefit of concessional rate of duty - The benefit stands denied by the Customs authorities only on a technical reason that the contract for supply with the foreign supplier has not been executed by the present importer - Held that - The benefit of concessional rate of duty under project import classifiable under Heading 98.01 of the Customs Tariff, is extended to those projects which are duly certified by the sponsoring authority - In the present case, the Jaipur Metro is being executed by DMRC and the sponsoring authority i.e. Ministry of Urban Development has certified the list of goods which are required to be imported for the Jaipur Metro Project. The goods being imported are meant for supply ultimately for the Jaipur Metro Project. The annexure containing the detailed bill of materials also stands recommended by the Ministry of Urban Development. We find that the Revenue has not made any allegation to the effect that the goods are not related to the Metro Rail Project and are not covered by the project import regulation. Consequently, there is no reason to deny the benefit of concessional rate of duty under Project Import Regulations. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant-importer.
Issues:
- Benefit of concessional rate of duty under project imports for goods imported by the appellant-importer. - Interpretation of the sponsoring authority's certificate for project imports. - Denial of concessional rate of duty by Customs authorities based on technical reasons. - Extending the benefit of concessional rate of duty under Project Import Regulations. Analysis: - The case involved three appeals addressing the same issue, decided through a common order. Two appeals by the importer challenged the rejection of concessional duty rate under project imports, while the Revenue's appeal contested the extension of project imports benefit to the importer. The facts revolved around the supply of metro cars for Jaipur Metro Project by M/s. BEML to M/s. DMRC, with the importer providing "breaking systems" parts. Importer sought concessional duty under Customs heading 98.01, facing denial based on the certificate issued by the Ministry of Urban Development favoring M/s. DMRC as the common contractee, leading to appeals and counter-appeals. - The certificate from the Ministry of Urban Development detailed the goods required for the Jaipur Metro Project and certified by M/s. BEML, listing the importer as the contractor for specific imports from M/s. Knorr Germany. The benefit of concessional duty under project imports, classified under Heading 98.01, is granted to projects certified by the sponsoring authority. The Tribunal noted that the Jaipur Metro Project certified by the Ministry of Urban Development included the importer's imports, contracted by M/s. BEML for metro car supply, emphasizing the technical denial by Customs authorities due to the importer not executing the foreign supplier contract. - Upon reviewing the sponsoring authority's certificate, the Tribunal found the imported goods listed for the Jaipur Metro Project, specifically meant for supply by the importer as M/s. BEML's contractor. The Customs denial was based on a technicality, as the goods were intended for the metro project and aligned with the project import regulations. The Tribunal highlighted the absence of any allegations from Revenue challenging the goods' relevance to the metro project, leading to the conclusion that the benefit of concessional duty under Project Import Regulations should not be denied. - Consequently, the Tribunal extended the benefit of concessional duty under Project Import Regulations, setting aside the impugned order contrary to their findings and dismissing the Revenue's appeal against granting such benefit. The judgment was pronounced on 17-2-2017 by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT New Delhi, with detailed analysis provided by Member (T) V. Padmanabhan.
|
