9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2025 (2) TMI 23 - AT - CustomsRejection of classification of the goods declared by the importer - Polyester bed sheet - classifiable under CTH 5407 or not - confiscation of the goods imported - levy of penalty - HELD THAT - An identical issue had come up for consideration before this Tribunal in the case of COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (PORT) KOLKATA VERSUS M/S. SILPHA FINVEST P. LIMITED 2024 (3) TMI 246 - CESTAT KOLKATA wherein it has been observed that We admit that the articles which have been imported by the respondent are woven fabric of synthetic filament yarn but they are Bed spreads / Bed sheets and quantity of the goods in numbers has been described by the respondent. In the circumstances the merit classification of the impugned goods is under CTH 6304 of the Customs Tariff Act. Therefore we classify the impugned goods as Bed spreads (Bed sheets) classifiable under CTH 6304 of the Customs Tariff Act. Conclusion - The appellant had correctly classified the goods under CTH 6304 making the confiscation and duty demands unsustainable. The demands confirmed against the appellant are not sustainable. Consequently no penalty is imposable on the appellants - Appeal allowed.
The appellant challenged the adjudicating authority's decision, which rejected the classification of imported goods declared by the appellant, ordered confiscation, confirmed a duty demand of Rs. 57,79,727/-, and imposed a penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. The core issue was the correct classification of goods declared as "Polyester bed sheet" under Tariff Item No. 6304 1990, which the Revenue contended should be classified as "Polyester Woven Fabrics" under CTH 5407.
The Tribunal considered whether the goods were correctly classified under CTH 6304 or should be reclassified under CTH 5407. The relevant legal framework involved the Customs Tariff Act, specifically Chapter 63, which includes "Other made up textile articles," and Chapter 54, which pertains to "Woven fabrics of synthetic filament yarn." The Tribunal referenced prior decisions in similar cases, notably Commissioner of Customs (Port), Kolkata v. Silpha Finvest P. Ltd. and Commissioner of Customs (Port), Kolkata v. M/s. Steel Syndicate, where it was determined that goods described as bed sheets, even if made of polyester yarn, retained their identity as bed sheets and were properly classifiable under CTH 6304. The Tribunal's reasoning was based on the description of the goods in the Bill of Entry as "Bed sheet (100% Polyester)" and the fact that the goods were presented in numbers, which aligned with the classification under CTH 6304. Despite the Revenue's argument that the goods were woven fabrics, the Tribunal concluded that the goods were indeed bed sheets and should be classified accordingly. The Tribunal found that the appellant had correctly classified the goods under CTH 6304, making the confiscation and duty demands unsustainable. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, holding that the goods were not liable for confiscation, no penalty was imposable, and no redemption fine was payable. The Tribunal set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeal in favor of the appellant.
|
