9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Interpretation of Notification No. 69/87-Cus. for concessional rate of customs duty on imported Compressor Housing. 2. Classification of goods under Heading No. 98.06 of the Customs Tariff. 3. Determination of whether the imported Turbocharger parts were interchangeable with motor vehicle parts. 4. Application of HSN explanatory notes in interpreting the exemption notification. Analysis: 1. The appeal involved the consideration of whether the Compressor Housing imported by the appellant qualified as an interchangeable part of motor vehicles for concessional customs duty under Notification No. 69/87-Cus. The dispute arose as the Turbocharger parts were deemed capable of being used in motor vehicles, affecting their eligibility for the said benefit. 2. The classification of the goods under Heading No. 98.06 of the Tariff was crucial in determining their eligibility for the concessional rate of customs duty. The appellant contended that the Turbocharger was a compressor classifiable under Heading No. 84.14, sub-heading No. 8414.80, emphasizing the importance of accurate classification for duty assessment. 3. The crux of the matter revolved around whether the imported Turbocharger parts were interchangeable with motor vehicle components. The appellant argued that the goods did not meet the criteria of interchangeability as defined in various dictionaries and publications, asserting that the Turbocharger was not a motor vehicle part. However, the Revenue maintained that as the goods were intended for motor vehicles and were actually used in a specific model, they fell under the exclusion clause of the notification. 4. The application of the HSN explanatory notes was cited by the appellant to support their interpretation of the exemption notification. Despite the reference to relevant definitions and provisions, the Tribunal upheld the decision of the Collector, Customs (Appeals), emphasizing that the exclusion clause of the notification aimed to prevent concessional duty benefits for parts interchangeable with motor vehicle components. In conclusion, the Tribunal rejected the appeal, affirming that the imported Turbocharger parts, despite their classification under Heading No. 98.06, were ineligible for the concessional rate of customs duty under Notification No. 69/87-Cus. due to their interchangeability with motor vehicle parts. The decision underscored the importance of accurate classification and adherence to exemption provisions in customs duty assessments.
|
