9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2009 (6) TMI 373 - AT - CustomsBase Station Controller (BSC) - Eligibility for concessional rate of duty under Notification No. 17/2001-Cus - Original authority found that the impugned goods were not BSC and denied the assessment in terms of Notification No. l7/01-Cus. In the impugned order, the Commissioner (Appeals) concurred with the finding of the original authority that the impugned goods did not constitute a complete BSC to qualify for the benefit of assessment at the concessional rate under Notification No. 17/2001-Cus - We find that out of the eight functional units necessary for the BSC as per the catalogue submitted, one of the functional units, namely, cable 6 GSWB, used for switching and connecting signalling circuit was not imported. - We also find that the importer never disputed that the imported goods were for upgrading an existing BSC in possession of the importer. We observe that the components of BSC under import are required for mounting on an existing BSC to upgrade its capacity. These goods do not form a complete BSC eligible for concessional assessment in terms of Notification No. 17/2003-Cus. - we sustain the impugned order and dismiss the appeal.
Issues:
Assessment of imported goods at concessional rate under Notification No. 17/2001-Cus as Base Station Controller (BSC) - Whether imported goods qualify as complete BSC for concessional assessment. Analysis: The case involved the import of goods declared as 'Base Station Controller' (BSC) by M/s. Tata Cellular Services (TCS) under Bill of Entry No. 286858, seeking assessment at a concessional rate per Notification No. 17/2001-Cus. The original authority and Commissioner (Appeals) concluded that the imported goods did not constitute a complete BSC for the concessional rate. The appellant argued that the imported goods were BSC without certain inessential parts like rack, signalling units, and cartridges, which were not functional components. By applying interpretative Rule 2(a), the appellant contended that the goods should be classified as BSC, extending the benefit of the notification. During the proceedings, the appellant's counsel presented technical literature and catalog from the manufacturer, NOKIA, asserting that the imported goods were complete BSC with all functional units. The missing components, such as the rack (a standard frame) and power supply units, were deemed non-essential. The appellant argued that the imported goods should be classified as BSC, as they contained all essential parts, and thus, should be eligible for the concessional rate under the notification. The JCDR contended that the consignment lacked essential functional units, such as the GSWB cable, necessary for upgrading the BSC. The JCDR highlighted that the optional components mentioned in the literature were crucial for upgrading the BSC and did not refer to standard components. The absence of the GSWB cable, a critical functional unit, was emphasized as a key factor. After considering the arguments and submissions, the Tribunal found that crucial functional units, including the GSWB cable, the Switching Matrix (SW64B), the control processor (SWCOP-S), and the signalling link terminal (AS7V), were not part of the consignment. These components were deemed essential for the BSC's functioning based on the manufacturer's literature. Additionally, it was noted that the imported goods were intended for upgrading an existing BSC and did not constitute a complete BSC eligible for concessional assessment under Notification No. 17/2003-Cus. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the lower authorities' decision to deny the concessional assessment for the imported goods, affirming the dismissal of the appeal.
|
