Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2012 (5) TMI 477

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... to modify physical identity of an article mentioned in notification imposing a duty on that article, which has to be interpreted strictly - The Directorate General of Anti Dumping and Allied Duties have clarified that anti-dumping duties were not recommended on parts/ components of CFL - the notification No. 138/2002-Cus., dated 10-12-2002 stated that the anti-dumping was recommended only in respect of two types of CFLs (i) Complete, ready to use compact fluorescent lamps wherein choke is integrated within the lamp (ii) Complete, ready to use compact fluorescent lamps wherein choke is external - Admittedly in the present case, the appellants have not imported CFLs, in a ready to use condition but have only imported parts of the same – in fa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... L but the goods put together constitute CFL in completely knocked down (CKD) condition and by virtue of Rule 2(a) of the General Rules for interpretation of First schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, the goods should have been classified as CFL and are leviable to Anti-Dumping Duty. 3. At this stage, we note that prior to the present proceedings, the appellants were issued a show cause notice for the earlier imports made by them, which was adjudicated by the Assistant Commissioner confirming demand of Anti-Dumping Duty. 4. On appeal against the said order of Asstt. Commissioner, Commissioner (Appeals) vide his order-in-appeal dated 24.11.05 set aside the confirmation of Anti Dumping Duty and imposition of penalty on the appella .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... o the clarification issued by the Ministry of Commerce and Industries vide its Office Memorandum F.No. 162/2006 DGAD dated 1.5.06. For better appreciation the said Circular is reproduced below:- Sub: Parts of CFL imported under HS Code 98539.90 being classified under 8539.31 ready to use CFL regarding. Please refer to your office Memorandum No. 354/205/2001-TRU (Part I) dated 20th April, 2006, forwarding copy of representation dated 4th April, 2006 of M/s. Khaitan Electricals Ltd., whereby clarification has been sought on the scope of the product CFL imported from China PR and covered under Anti Dumping Investigation conducted by the Designated Authority. In this regard, it is clarified that: (a) Anti-dumping duties were recomme .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . The anti dumping duty imposed in the aforesaid notification applies to import of Compact Fluorescent Lamps (CFL) from People s Republic of China and Hong Kong at specified rates. 3. The Directorate General of Anti Dumping and Allied Duties? (DGAD) have clarified that anti-dumping duties were not recommended on parts/ components of CFL. It has been stated by them that the anti-dumping in the above notification was recommended only in respect of two types of CFLs (i) Complete, ready to use compact fluorescent lamps wherein choke is integrated within the lamp (ii) Complete, ready to use compact fluorescent lamps wherein choke is external. 4. In view of the above, it is hereby clarified that the Anti-Dumping Duty imposed vide notifica .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s of Notification No. 138/2002-Cus, is not leviable on the parts of CFL. 10. Apart from the above, we find that the said issue has been the subject matter of various decisions of Tribunal as also of the Hon ble High Courts. The Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of Plaza Lamps and Tubes Ltd. vs. CC [2007 (209) ELT 182 (Del) has held that imported items being part of CFL, without choke, Anti-Dumping Duty is not imposable. To the similar effect are the following decisions: 1) Anchor Daewoo Indus. Ltd. vs. CC Kandla [2007 (214) ELT 230 (Tri-Ahmd)]; 2) Wipro Ltd. vs. CC, Chennai [2007 (217) ELT 558 (Tri-Chennai)]; 3) Philips India Ltd. vs. CC, Mumbai [2004 (166) ELT 49 (Tri-Mum)]; and 4) Award Electronics vs. CC, Chennai [ .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates