2017 (12) TMI 511 - AT - Customs

Benefit of N/N. 4/2006 - Classification of imported goods - Polished Marble Slabs - classified under CTH 68 02 2110 or under CTH 680221 90? - Held that - the notification mentions only 6802 2110 and does not mention 6802 2190 - vide Circular No. DOF. No. 334/03/2012-TRU, dated 16.03.2012 the Board has clarified that Polished Marble Slabs are classifiable under CTH 6802 2190 and the benefit of Notification No.4/2006-CE, dated 01.03.2006 is available to Polished Marble Slabs. - The Hon ble Apex Court in the case of M/s. Suchitra Components Ltd. 2007 (1) TMI 4 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA has held that beneficial Circular is to applied retrospectively. Benefit of notification allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
Classification of imported goods under CTH 6802 2110 or 6802 2190 for availing concessional duty under Notification No.4/2006-CE.

Analysis:
The case involved a manufacturer/exporter importing marble blocks/slabs and claiming concessional duty under Notification No.4/2006-CE. The Department alleged that the goods were wrongly classified under CTH 6802 2110 instead of 6802 2190, denying the partial exemption. The original authority confirmed the classification under CTH 6802 2190, imposing duty and penalties. The appellants argued that the goods fell under 6802 2110, citing Circulars and judicial precedents to support their classification. The Department contended that the goods should be classified under 6802 2190, as per the notification, and that the Circular cannot be applied retrospectively.

The Tribunal examined the relevant Tariff items and Notification No.4/2006-CE, which mentioned only 6802 2110, not 6802 2190. The Board's Circular clarified that "Polished Marble Slabs" are classifiable under 6802 2190 and extended the exemption to them. Referring to judicial precedents, the Tribunal held that beneficial Circulars are to be applied retrospectively. Citing the Apex Court's judgment in a similar case, the Tribunal concluded that the denial of the notification's benefit was unjustified. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeals were allowed with consequential reliefs, if any.

This judgment highlights the importance of proper classification under the Tariff and the applicability of Circulars in interpreting notifications for duty concessions. It underscores the need for consistency in applying beneficial Circulars retrospectively to ensure fair treatment of taxpayers.