9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (1) TMI 736 - AT - CustomsClassification of imported goods - flanges - classifiable under 73072100 as contended by the department or under 8503 as confirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals)? - benefit of N/N. 12/2012 dated 17.3.2012 - HELD THAT - The very same issue was decided by the Tribunal in the case of M/S. SEW EURODRIVE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS CHENNAI-II COMMISSIONERATE 2024 (1) TMI 465 - CESTAT CHENNAI and after considering the facts the Tribunal has held that the flanges are parts of WOEG and are classifiable under 8503 and not CTH 7307 as claimed by the department. It was also held that the flanges are eligible for the exemption as per notification no. 12/2012. Thus, the appeals filed by the department is without merits - appeal dismissed.
Issues: Classification of imported flanges under Customs Tariff Headings (CTH) 73072100 as contended by the department or under 8503 as confirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals).
The respondents imported 'Flanges' for Wind Operated Electric Generators (WOEG) classifying them under CTH 85030010, seeking exemption u/s notification no.12/2012-CE. The original authority denied the exemption, classifying the flanges under 730791. The Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the appeal, holding the flanges are parts of WOEG under CTH 85030010 and eligible for exemption. The department appealed to the Tribunal challenging this decision. The department argued that the flanges, used in the towers of WOG, are not part of WOEG but items of general use, classifiable under 730791, thus ineligible for the exemption. The respondent contended that the flanges are integral to WOEG towers' construction and specifically designed for them, citing a CBIC circular and a Supreme Court decision. The Tribunal, referencing a previous case, held that the flanges are indeed parts of WOEG, classifiable under 8503 and eligible for the exemption. It emphasized that classification depends on functionality and purpose, rejecting the department's re-classification attempt. Based on this analysis and evidence, the Tribunal found the department's appeals without merit and dismissed them.
|
