2017 (10) TMI 301 - AT - Customs

Levy of duty on goods actually imported - Import of Methanol - Department confirms the demand of duty of Customs based on the quantity of goods mentioned in invoice and the transaction value given irrespective of the quantity of the goods imported received at the Port - Held that - the issue is settled by the Hon ble Supreme Court s decision in the case of Mangalore Refinery & Petrochemicals Ltd. vs. CCE 2015 (9) TMI 245 - SUPREME COURT wherein it has been held that the duty of customs is to be charged only on the quantity actually received into shore tank in Port in India; the quantity shown in the Bills of Lading cannot be used for charging duty as it does not reflect the quantity of the goods received at the place of importation - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
- Demand of duty of Customs based on quantity mentioned in invoice vs. quantity received at the Port
- Applicability of Hon'ble Supreme Court's decision in Mangalore Refinery & Petrochemicals Ltd. vs. CCE
- Interpretation of Sections 12, 13, 14, 23 of the Customs Act
- Validity of Tribunal's reasoning on duty calculation
- Impact of ad valorem duty on quantity determination
- Consideration of transaction value in duty calculation

Analysis:

The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Bangalore pertains to an appeal by M/s. Chemplast Sanmar Ltd. against the demand of duty of Customs based on the quantity mentioned in the invoice, irrespective of the actual quantity of goods received at the Port. The appellant argued that duty should only be charged for the quantity received, as per shore tank receipts, rather than the quantity mentioned in the Bills of Lading/Invoices. The Tribunal considered the settled issue as per the Hon'ble Supreme Court's decision in Mangalore Refinery & Petrochemicals Ltd. vs. CCE, emphasizing that customs duty is to be charged only on the quantity actually received into the shore tank in India.

The Tribunal highlighted the legal principles under the Customs Act, stating that the levy of import duty can only be on goods imported into India, i.e., brought into India from outside. The judgment emphasized that the taxable event for imported goods is the import itself, which occurs when goods cross into territorial waters and continue until they become part of the country's goods mass. The Tribunal criticized the Tribunal's reasoning for considering the bill of lading quantity for duty calculation, stating that it does not reflect the quantity at the time and place of importation.

Furthermore, the Tribunal addressed the misinterpretation of Sections 13 and 23 of the Customs Act by the Tribunal and clarified that customs duty is not leviable on goods that are lost, pilfered, or destroyed until they are out of customs and in the hands of the importer. The judgment also refuted the Tribunal's view on the impact of ad valorem duty on determining the quantity of goods imported and the relevance of transaction value in duty calculation. The Tribunal set aside the Tribunal's judgment and declared that the quantity actually received into a shore tank in an Indian port should be the basis for customs duty payment, aligning with the Hon'ble Supreme Court's decision.

In conclusion, the impugned orders were set aside, and the appeals were allowed in favor of the appellant, directing the customs authorities to take consequential action in accordance with the declared law. The judgment reaffirmed the legal position that customs duty should be based on the actual quantity of goods received, as per the Supreme Court's interpretation and the statutory provisions of the Customs Act.