9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 1182X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed by the imported goods - penalty cannot be sustained. Appeal disposed off. - C/00228/2008 & C/40506/2015 - 42245-42246/2017 - Dated:- 4-8-2017 - Smt. Sulekha Beevi C.S, Member (Judicial) And Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member (Technical) For the Appellant - Shri Hari Radhakrishnan, Adv. For the Respondent - Shri A. Cletus, ADC (AR) ORDER Per: Bench Both these appeals involving same appellant and similar/connected issues, they are taken-up for common disposal. 2.1 Appeal No.C/00228/2008: - M/s. Sun TV Network Ltd., [hereinafter referred to as M/s. STNL ], the appellant herein filed a Bill of Entry, dated 12.06.2007 for clearance of one Unit of 9.3 Meter Compact Cassegrain Antenna Sub-system - Model 9.3 KPK [hereinafter referred to as CC-AS ] classifying it under CTH 85291019 with declared assessable value of ₹ 68,11,430/- and claiming duty benefit under Customs Notification No.25/2005 [Sl.No.15] as or aerials or 'antennae' of a kind used for 'radio-telephony' and 'radio-telegraphy'. It appeared from scrutiny of the import documents, that goods imported were Sub-systems and not Antenna'. It furt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .No.15] has been denied on the ground that appellants had imported 'Antenna Sub-system used in television broadcasting and not for 'radio-telephony' or 'radio-telegraphy. It is contended that the 'antenna' is used with apparatus, which transmits radio signals, which in turn can be transmitted through' telephony', 'telegraphy' or 'television'. Even if the goods imported are used for transmitting radio signals for 'television', however, the 'antenna' is of the kind, which is used in apparatus of 'telephony' and 'telegraphy'. 4.2 So also, adoption of value for goods imported by Bill of Entry No.475717, dated 04.06.2007 is not correct, since the later import relate to Two Units of 9.3 Meter Compact Cassegrain Antenna Sub-system-Model 9.3 KPCC , whereas, in appeal no. C/00328/2008 goods imported was one Unit of 9.3 Meter Compact Cassegrain Antenna Sub-system - Model 9.3 KPK. 5. In respect of appeal no. C/40506/2015, learned advocate contends that they had submitted detailed packing list to demonstrate that all the components of 'antenna' have been imported in a disk assembly conditio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the International Telecommunication Union (hereinafter referred to as ITU ). The Ku band is a portion of the electromagnetic spectrum in the microwave range of frequencies ranging from 11.7 to 12.7 Giga Hertz. [downlink frequencies] and 14 to 14.5 Giga Hertz. (uplink frequencies). Ku band satellites are also used for backhauls and particularly for satellite from the remote locations back to a television network's studio for editing and broadcasting. 8.2 From the catalogue produced by the importer and from the website of the supplier, it was found that the CGAS are designed for 3.4 to 15 Giga Hertz. frequency operation and the minimum frequency used for downlink is 3.625 Giga Hertz. and the maximum frequency used for unlinking is 14.500 Giga Hertz. 8.3 In the event, the adjudicating authority has correctly concluded that the subject imported goods cannot be considered as 'of a kind used in the apparatus for radio telephony' and 'radio telegraphy,' leave alone the issue of whether the goods are 'antenna' or 'antenna sub-system . 8.4 Once it is established that the imported goods are not of a type used with apparatus for 'radio-telephony ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ates from the belief of the department that imported item is not antenna' but 'antenna sub-systems' and hence cannot get benefit of Notification No.21/2002-Cus., dated 01.03.2002 [Sl.No.244]. In respect of this issue, appellants have alluded to the details in the packing list, which give the list of all items as well as packs of crates/panels details. Appellants have also contended that the WPC Licence has been issued to the appellants for import of 'antenna' only and not 'parts of antenna' and that the same has been ascertained by the Customs officer at the time of clearance of the goods and the said officer has also countersigned the WPC Licence. We find that although the demand notice dated 01.11.2007 alleges that the goods imported as 'sub-assembly of antenna and not 'antenna,' there is no reasoning given in the notice for such an allegation. Even in the order dated 05.11.2013 of original authority, the discussion therein on this point are only restricted to the finding that supplier invoices shows that the goods imported are antenna sub-systems . In response to the show-cause notice, appellants vide their letter dated 13.11.2007 and a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
