2018 (7) TMI 1227 - AT - Customs

Test of imported Natural Uncoated Ground Calcium Carbonate - facility of CRCL to conduct the test of Natural Calcium Carbonate - Revenue s case is that CRCL is fully equipped to test the goods - Held that - The appellant has referred to Circular No. 43/2017. Customs dated 16.11.2017, clarifying that CRCL has shortlisted the items whose samples cannot be tested in their Laboratories at present and also identified the Lab, where such samples could be tested. Natural Calcite Powder is one of the specified product which CRCL Lab is unable to test - there is no merit in Revenue s case - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Dispute over classification of imported product.
2. Inability of CRCL and Indian Bureau of Mines to conduct required tests.
3. Discrepancies in test reports by CRCL.
4. Request for retesting at a different laboratory.
5. Enforcement of bank guarantees without finalizing assessment.
6. Appeal against Commissioner's order for retesting.
7. Interpretation of Circular No. 43/2017 Customs.

Analysis:
1. The case involved a Pvt. Ltd. Co. importing 'Chalk-Natural Calcium Carbonate' and facing classification issues under the Customs Tariff. Samples sent for testing were returned by CRCL and Indian Bureau of Mines due to lack of testing facilities, leading to reliance on a NABL accredited lab for testing.

2. CRCL's test reports declared the samples as 'Uncoated Precipitated Calcium Carbonate,' raising doubts due to discrepancies in the testing process. Despite requests for retesting in a different lab, the Customs authorities at ICD-Loni did not take action, prompting a legal battle for retesting at an NABL accredited lab.

3. The Commissioner's refusal to allow retesting at a different lab led to appeals and court interventions. The High Court directed the issue to CESTAT, which decided in favor of retesting at a lab other than CRCL. The Deputy Commissioner initiated recovery of bank guarantees, highlighting the need for finalizing assessments before enforcement.

4. The Commissioner (Appeals) directed retesting from a government-approved lab other than CRCL for a comprehensive assessment. The Revenue's appeal, citing CRCL's capabilities, was dismissed based on Circular No. 43/2017 Customs, which clarified CRCL's limitations in testing certain products.

5. The judgment emphasized the importance of retesting in a suitable lab and finalizing assessments to ensure justice and adherence to natural justice principles. The rejection of the Revenue's appeal affirmed the necessity of proper testing procedures and compliance with established guidelines.

Conclusion:
The judgment addressed the classification dispute, testing inadequacies, retesting requests, bank guarantee enforcement, and the interpretation of Circular No. 43/2017 Customs. It underscored the significance of accurate testing, fair assessment finalization, and adherence to legal principles in resolving import-related issues effectively.