9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (12) TMI 622X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... comes irrelevant. It is also significant because of the claim of the learned counsel that goods falling under CTH 84714190 are not covered by Section 3A of the Central Excise Act read with the Legal Metrology Rules and therefore, Additional Duty of Customs does not have to be determined as per the RSP. If it is so, then the allegation of misdeclaration of RSP will require re-examination. Additional Duty of Customs may also have to be re-determined. Consequently, it needs to be examined if the confiscation, fine, penalty, etc. still survive. We are of the considered view that the Principal Commissioner should get an opportunity to examine this claim for classification under CTH 84714190 which the appellant has now made and the consequenti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3. According to the Revenue, the appellant importer wrongly claimed the benefit of notification No.24/2005-Cus dated 1.3.2005 (S.No. 17) and also mis-declared the Retail Sales Price [RSP] of the imported goods. Consequently, the differential duty demand was confirmed invoking extended period of limitation and the imported goods were held liable for confiscation and fine and penalties were imposed. The goods in question are (i) TWB-E65 Hitevision 65 LED Display for ADP Machine (VDU), (ii)TWB-UBC75 Hitevision 75 LED Display for ADP Machine (VDU) and (iii)TWB-UBC 86 Hitevision 86 LED Display for ADP Machine (VDU). 4. The differential duty was confirmed on the ground that the appellant had wrongly availed the benefit of exemption notifi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e exemption notification. 7. According to the learned counsel the dispute regarding the mis-declaration of RSP also becomes irrelevant because, if this classification is accepted, assessment of additional duty of Customs will be based on the value plus BCD and not be based on the RSP because goods under 84714190 are not notified under section 3A of the Central Excise Act. 8. Further, according to the learned counsel the confiscation of the goods, fine, penalties, etc. also cannot sustain as a consequence to the revised classification. 9. Learned authorised representative supports the impugned order. 10. Having considered the rival submissions, we find that a new plea of change of classification to CTH84714190 is raised by the le ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
