Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 1997 (8) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

1997 (8) TMI 298 - AT - Customs

Issues: Classification of imported goods under CTH 9027.80 or CTH 85.31, Benefit of exemption Notification 49/78, Clearance under OGL, and Reduction of redemption fine.

In this case, the appellants imported an "NEOTOX" Exhaust Gas Indicator, claiming it to be a portable battery-operated exhaust gas analyzer with an indicator and audible alarm, seeking classification under CTH 9027.80 along with exemption Notification 49/78. Customs authorities, however, classified the goods under CTH 85.31, arguing that it is an instrument that sounds an alarm on detecting gases beyond recognized levels. The appellants contended that being a gas analyzer, it falls under CTH 90.27. The Tribunal analyzed the nature of the goods, emphasizing that they primarily serve as instruments to warn of hazardous gases exceeding safety limits. The HSN Notes were referred to, highlighting that CTH 90.27 covers gas and smoke analysis apparatus related to specific gases, while CTH 85.31 pertains to electric signaling apparatus, including gas alarms with detectors. The Tribunal concluded that the goods, functioning as both an analyzer and alarm system, align more closely with CTH 85.31 due to their primary purpose of signaling gas hazards.

Regarding the claim for clearance under OGL, the appellants argued for entitlement under Appendix 6 Para 47(4) as a portable gas and combustion analyzer falling under energy savings/consumption equipment. However, the Tribunal found the goods to be alarms primarily, leading to the rejection of the OGL clearance plea. Additionally, the Tribunal addressed the redemption fine, reducing it from Rs. 75,000 to Rs. 35,000 based on the facts and circumstances of the case. Ultimately, the Tribunal upheld the original order with the modification of the redemption fine, rejecting the appeal on classification and OGL clearance while reducing the fine amount.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates