2018 (10) TMI 1157 - AT - Customs

Facility available in the laboratories to test the samples of imported goods - Natural Ground Calcium Carbonate - some samples of the imported consignment of similar product were sent by the Customs Authorities, ICD Loni, vide Test Memo Nos.208 dated 04.06.2013, 210 dated 12.06.2013 and 211 dated 12.06.2013 to CRCL, New Delhi. However, the samples were returned back by the CRCL with their covering letter where in they admitted that they do not possess the facility to conduct the test of Natural Calcium Carbonate and returned the samples to the Custom Authorities. Revenue has filed the appeal on the ground 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 products which CRCL Lab is unable to test. There is no merit in Revenue s appeal - appeal dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Classification of imported goods under Customs Tariff.
2. Inability of CRCL and Indian Bureau of Mines to conduct required tests.
3. Discrepancies in test reports by CRCL.
4. Request for retesting samples at a different laboratory.
5. Enforcement of bank guarantees by Customs authorities.
6. Appeal against Commissioner's order for retesting.
7. Applicability of Circular No.43/2017 on CRCL's testing capabilities.

Analysis:
1. The case involved the classification of imported goods, specifically "Natural Ground Calcium Carbonate," under the Customs Tariff. The appellant claimed to have imported the goods classified under Chapter 25. Various test reports and samples were sent to different laboratories for testing to determine the nature of the imported product.

2. The Customs Authorities faced challenges as both CRCL and Indian Bureau of Mines expressed their inability to conduct the required tests due to the lack of specific testing equipment. Despite multiple attempts, the samples were returned without testing, leading to uncertainties regarding the classification of the goods.

3. Discrepancies arose in the test reports provided by CRCL, where the samples were declared as "Uncoated Precipitated Calcium Carbonate" based solely on an oil absorption test. The reports did not address critical queries related to calcinations, crystalline structure, and other essential tests, raising doubts about the accuracy of the classification.

4. The appellant repeatedly requested the Customs Authorities for retesting the samples at a different NABL accredited laboratory. However, the authorities did not take action, leading to the appellant's goods being cleared after depositing a Bank Guarantee at higher rates applicable to a different classification.

5. The Customs Authorities enforced bank guarantees against the appellant for provisional release of goods, despite the pending finalization of assessments and the appellant's payment of differential duty under protest. The appellant's requests for retesting at another laboratory were disregarded by the authorities.

6. The Revenue appealed against the Commissioner's order directing retesting of samples at a different laboratory, arguing that CRCL was fully equipped for testing. The appellant cited Circular No.43/2017, indicating that CRCL was unable to test certain specified products, including Natural Calcite Powder.

7. The Tribunal rejected the Revenue's appeal, emphasizing that the inability of CRCL to test specific products, as per Circular No.43/2017, supported the appellant's case. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's order for retesting at a different laboratory equipped to conduct all required tests, ensuring a fair assessment based on accurate findings.

This detailed analysis highlights the complexities surrounding the classification and testing of imported goods, the challenges faced by the authorities in conducting tests, discrepancies in test reports, and the importance of retesting at a reliable laboratory to ensure accurate assessments and fair treatment of the appellant.