2019 (1) TMI 780 - AT - Customs

Classification of imported goods - Instachk HBsAg Test Card (WB) - whether classified under chapter 30 or under Chapter 38? - N/N. 21/2002-Cus dated 01.03.2002 (S No 83, List 4 Sl No 31) - Held that - It is now settled law that against the assessment of B/E, appellants can file the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeal). In their appeal they could have claimed re-assessment of B/E, in terms of classification, valuation or any other benefit which they intended to seek but has been not sought by them at the time of filing the B/E. The matter in respect of re-classification and claim of exemption need to be remanded back to the assessing authority for reconsideration of the said claim on the basis of the evidences that appellant would like to place on record in support of his claim. After considering the said claim and evidences assessing authority shall pass a reasoned speaking order accepting or denying the claim of appellant. The matter remanded back to assessing authority for reconsideration - appeal allowed by way of remand.

Issues:
Classification of imported goods under the Customs Tariff, Benefit of exemption under Notification No. 21/2002, Submission of technical literature at the time of assessment, Entitlement to submit additional evidence at the appellate stage, Appellate authority's power to assess and impose duty, Appeal against assessment order, Remand for reconsideration of re-classification and exemption claim.

Classification of Imported Goods:
The appellants imported goods classified under heading 30022011 and paid the duty accordingly. Subsequently, they claimed a different classification under heading 38220090 for the same goods, seeking exemption under Notification No. 21/2002. The Commissioner (Appeal) rejected their appeal, citing the lack of technical literature or evidence at the time of importation. The appellants argued that they could have filed the appeal against the assessment order to claim the benefit of exemption, even if not initially sought. The Tribunal noted settled law allowing appellants to file appeals for re-assessment of goods, contrary to the Commissioner's findings.

Submission of Technical Literature:
The Commissioner (Appeal) held that the appellants failed to submit technical literature or evidence at the time of assessment, leading to the rejection of their appeal. However, the Tribunal highlighted that the absence of technical literature does not preclude the appellants from claiming benefits admissible under the law. The Tribunal referred to a Karnataka High Court decision emphasizing the importance of technical particulars submitted during the appellate stage, which were crucial in determining the nature of imported goods.

Entitlement to Submit Additional Evidence:
The Commissioner (Appeal) disallowed the appellants from submitting additional evidence at the appellate stage under Rule 5 of Customs (Appeals) Rules, 1982. However, the Tribunal disagreed with this stance, citing precedents and legal principles that allow appellants to present new evidence during the appeal process. The Tribunal clarified that the appellants should have the opportunity to support their claims with relevant evidence, even if not submitted during the initial assessment.

Appellate Authority's Power to Assess and Impose Duty:
The Tribunal highlighted the duty of the authority to assess goods and impose duty according to law, including statutory notifications. Referring to previous court decisions, the Tribunal emphasized that the failure to claim benefits at the time of importation should not result in the denial of such benefits. The Tribunal underscored that manifest injustice or errors should not lead to the imposition of duties that were not otherwise payable.

Appeal Against Assessment Order:
The Tribunal clarified that assessment orders passed on bill of entries are appealable, even without a speaking order. The Tribunal referenced a Bombay High Court case to support the notion that the absence of a speaking order does not render the assessment order non-appealable. The Tribunal emphasized that appellants have the right to challenge assessment orders and seek reclassification or refunds based on the merits of their claims.

Remand for Reconsideration of Re-Classification and Exemption Claim:
In light of various court decisions, the Tribunal decided to remand the matter back to the assessing authority for reconsideration of the re-classification and exemption claim. The Tribunal directed the assessing authority to evaluate the appellants' claims based on the evidence they wish to present. The Tribunal instructed the assessing authority to issue a reasoned speaking order accepting or denying the appellants' claims within three months of the order.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, remanding the matter for reconsideration by the assessing authority, emphasizing the importance of evaluating claims based on evidence and legal principles.

← Previous Next →