9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Eligibility of Nickel-cadmium batteries for exemption from Excise duty under Notification No. 16/55 based on classification as 'Stationary batteries'. Detailed Analysis: The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, New Delhi concerns the eligibility of Nickel-cadmium batteries imported by the appellants for exemption from Excise duty under Notification No. 16/55. The issue revolves around whether these batteries can be classified as 'Stationary batteries' as per the notification. The appellants argue that the batteries, soldered on printed Circuit Boards in emergency lights, meet the definition of stationary batteries as per ISI specifications. They claim that since the batteries are fixed permanently on the PCB, they should be considered stationary batteries and thus qualify for the duty exemption. The department's position is that the imported cells, although soldered into emergency lights, are not stationary batteries as they are used in portable devices like emergency lights, transformers, radios, and cameras. They argue that stationary batteries are typically heavy and used in fixed locations such as power houses or power-generating plants for electricity storage. The department contends that the batteries being used in portable devices disqualify them from being classified as stationary batteries under the notification. The Tribunal refers to the IS 1885-1986 specifications, which define secondary batteries as electrochemical systems capable of storing and releasing electrical energy. While Nickel-cadmium batteries are recognized as secondary batteries, the crucial factor in determining eligibility for the duty exemption is whether they qualify as stationary batteries, designed for service in a fixed location. The Tribunal emphasizes that merely being fixed on a PCB does not automatically classify the batteries as stationary. The interpretation of 'designed for service in the fixed location' implies that the battery should be intended for use in a specific, unchanging spot. Upon examination, the Tribunal concludes that the imported batteries do not meet the criteria to be classified as stationary batteries. The literature from the supplier Hitachi and the Tariff Advice No. 24/74 do not definitively establish the batteries as stationary. Additionally, a certificate obtained post-importation is deemed unreliable. Consequently, the Tribunal rules that the appellants have failed to prove that the batteries qualify as stationary batteries as per the notification. Therefore, the benefit of the duty exemption under Notification No. 16/55 is rightfully denied to them, and the appeal is rejected.
|
