2019 (11) TMI 450 - AT - Customs

Levy of Additional Duty of Customs - Section 116 of Finance Act, 1999 - HELD THAT - Very identical issue has been considered by this Tribunal in the case of M/S ATLANTIC SHIPPING PVT. LTD VERSUS C.C. JAMNAGAR (PREV) 2018 (9) TMI 458 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD where it was held that the benefit of Exemption from additional duty of customs levied under Sub Section (1) of section 116 of Finance Act, 1999 has to be extended to the goods which are entitled to exemption under Notification 94/96-Customs. Tribunal being the identical issue involved the Additional Duty of Customs in the appellant s case is exempted in terms of the Sub Section (1) of the Section 116 of the Finance Act, 1999. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
Whether the appellant is required to pay Additional Duty of Customs under Section 116 of Finance Act, 1999.

Analysis:
The case involved a dispute regarding the requirement of the appellant to pay Additional Duty of Customs under Section 116 of the Finance Act, 1999. The appellant argued that a previous tribunal decision in a similar case supported their position, where it was held that the Additional Duty of Customs was applicable at a specific rate. The Revenue, represented by the Superintendent, supported the findings of the impugned order. The Tribunal examined Section 116 of the Finance Act, which pertains to the levy and collection of additional duty of customs on specified goods imported into India. The Tribunal noted that Sub Section (3) of the Act extends the benefit of exemptions under the Customs Act to the additional duty of customs levied under Section 116. The Tribunal referenced a decision related to a similar provision in the Finance Act of 2001 to support their interpretation of the law. The Tribunal concluded that the benefit of exemption from additional duty of customs under Section 116 should be extended to goods entitled to exemption under Notification 94/96-Customs.

The Tribunal considered previous decisions cited by the Revenue, noting that one decision was made without considering a specific provision of the law and another was an ex-parte decision without representation from the appellant. The Tribunal also addressed an instruction that was contrary to the decision in the case of Toyota Kirloskar Motor P. Ltd, dismissing it as a mere direction without justification. Ultimately, the Tribunal held that the appellant was entitled to the benefit of exemption from the additional duty of customs under Section 116 of the Finance Act, 1999, as long as the goods were covered by the relevant Customs notification. Consequently, the impugned orders were set aside, and the appeals were allowed in favor of the appellant.