Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2000 (5) TMI AT This
Issues Involved:
1. Classification of imported goods. 2. Applicability of exemption from customs duty. 3. Correctness of valuation of imported goods. 4. Validity of penalties imposed on the appellant company and its Directors. Summary: 1. Classification of Imported Goods: The primary issue was whether the imported drawings, designs, plans, etc., should be classified under Customs Tariff Heading 4911.99 as "other printed matters" or under Heading 49.01 as "printed books." The Tribunal examined various precedents and concluded that the materials imported, contained in 97 volumes, were indeed "books" as they met the physical characteristics of books. The Tribunal held that the materials should be classified under Heading 49.01, which specifically describes "printed books." 2. Applicability of Exemption from Customs Duty: The appellants claimed exemption from duty u/s Notification No. 25/95-Cus., dated 16-3-1995, which exempts printed books under Chapter Heading 49. The Tribunal agreed, stating that since the imported goods are classified as printed books under Heading 49.01, they are entitled to complete exemption from customs duty. 3. Correctness of Valuation of Imported Goods: Given the conclusion that the imported goods are exempt from duty, the Tribunal found it unnecessary to address the correctness of the valuation of the goods as done by the Commissioner of Customs. 4. Validity of Penalties Imposed: The Tribunal reversed the order-in-original No. 95/A&R/VS/97, dated 31-10-1997, in its entirety, which included setting aside the penalties imposed on the appellant company and its Directors u/s 112 of the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal found the contrary view taken by the Commissioner of Customs to be incorrect. Conclusion: The appeals were allowed, holding that the imported materials are books coming under Tariff Heading 49.01 and are entitled to complete exemption from customs duty as per Notification No. 25/95. The penalties imposed on the appellant company and its Directors were also set aside.
|