2012 (10) TMI 112 - AT - Customs

Benefit of Notification - certificate of origin - benefit of Notification No. 85/2004-Cus., dated 31-8-2004 was not claimed by the respondents in the Bill of Entry filed by them benefit claimed before the Commissioner (Appeals) - Held that - merely because certificate was not produced before the Deputy Commissioner cannot be made a ground for denial of exemption benefit, if the same is otherwise available to the importer.

Summary

Issues:
1. Benefit of Notification No. 85/2004-Cus. not extended to the importer during the assessment of the Bill of Entry.
2. Requirement of a certificate of country of origin under the said Notification.
3. Production of the certificate before the Commissioner (Appeals) without prior submission to the Deputy Commissioner or Assistant Commissioner of Customs.
4. Power of the Commissioner (Appeals) to examine and extend benefits based on the certificate of origin.
5. Validity of the Commissioner (Appeals) decision in extending the benefit under the Notification.
6. Relevance of previous Tribunal judgments in the current case.

Issue 1:
The respondents imported color picture tubes exempted from basic customs duty under Notification No. 85/2004-Cus. However, they paid duty without claiming the exemption initially. The Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the appeal after examining a certificate of origin, leading to the Revenue's appeal.

Issue 2:
The appeal raised concerns about the requirement under Notification No. 85/2004-Cus. for satisfaction regarding the origin of the goods from Thailand. The Revenue argued that as the certificate was not produced before the Deputy Commissioner, its submission to the Commissioner (Appeals) was unjustified.

Issue 3:
The Tribunal noted that the benefit of the Notification was not claimed in the Bill of Entry, absolving the need for the certificate before the Deputy Commissioner. The Commissioner (Appeals) examined the certificate himself, finding it valid since the goods were from Thailand.

Issue 4:
The Revenue did not dispute the authenticity of the certificate but objected to its direct submission to the Commissioner (Appeals) without prior verification by the original authority. The Tribunal found no fault in the Commissioner (Appeals) independently verifying the certificate.

Issue 5:
The Tribunal highlighted the Revenue's contradictory stance on the Commissioner (Appeals)' power to remand matters. It emphasized that the absence of the certificate before the Deputy Commissioner should not hinder the importer's entitlement to exemption benefits if otherwise valid.

Issue 6:
The Tribunal distinguished previous judgments cited by the Revenue, noting that they did not involve the Commissioner (Appeals) personally examining and relying on the certificate of origin. It upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)' decision to extend the benefit under the Notification.

In conclusion, the Appellate Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)' decision to extend the benefit of Notification No. 85/2004-Cus. to the importer based on a valid certificate of origin from Thailand. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, emphasizing the Commissioner (Appeals)' authority to independently verify such certificates and grant benefits accordingly.