9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved:
Classification of imported goods under sub-heading No. 6002.43 or Heading 58.04 of the Customs Tariff Act. Detailed Analysis: The appeal involved a dispute regarding the classification of goods imported by M/s. Vestergard Frandsen (I) Pvt. Ltd. The question was whether the goods should be classified as knitted fabrics under sub-heading No. 6002.43 or as net fabric under Heading 58.04 of the Customs Tariff Act. The Appellants argued that they had received an order for Knitted Fabrics, imported a consignment from Vietnam, and provided expert opinions from Indian Institute of Technology and Northern India Textile Research Association supporting their claim. They also highlighted that the Deputy Commissioner's classification was based on physical examination without a test report, and the Revenue had not presented sufficient evidence to classify the goods under Heading 58.04. The Appellants further pointed out that the personal opinion of the Customs Appraiser should not be equated with expert opinion, citing relevant case law. In response, the Department argued that the goods were declared as Netting Fabric in the invoice, indicating they should be classified under Heading 58.04. They contested the reliance on expert opinions obtained by the Appellants without the Department's knowledge, questioning the validity of those opinions. The Deputy Commissioner's findings emphasized the absence of certain characteristics typical of knitted fabric, supporting the classification under Heading 58.04. The Department also mentioned a previous import where a test report confirmed the fabric as netted fabric. Upon considering both sides' submissions, the Tribunal analyzed the Customs Tariff headings relevant to the dispute. They noted discrepancies between the order placed by the Appellants for knitted netting fabric and the description provided by the foreign supplier as 'netting fabric' in the invoice and packing list. The Tribunal highlighted that the Deputy Commissioner's findings contradicted the Appellants' claims regarding the fabric's characteristics. They rejected the appeal, stating that the Appellants failed to prove that the imported goods were knitted netting fabric, especially due to the lack of clarity in the supplier's description and the absence of evidence supporting the Appellants' classification. In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the classification of the imported goods as net fabric under Heading 58.04, based on the evidence presented and the discrepancies in the descriptions provided by the supplier and the Appellants. The decision emphasized the importance of accurate descriptions and characteristics in determining the classification of goods under the Customs Tariff Act.
|
