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

2001 (6) TMI 135

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... red for clearing at lower rate of duty under heading 8421, instead of 3920.79 as was being declared and assessed earlier. One such consignment was found under clearance vide BE 009557 dated 17-4-1993 filed by M/s. MIPL for clearance of filter. Material along with an Invoice enclosed at CIF value USD 5325.80 which was assessed and duty was paid as assessed. On comparison with the Invoice obtained by DRI from their sources, it was revealed that the value should have been USD 12022.45. The difference being only in Unit prices while freight, insurance, forwarding charges was the same. These goods were seized on 21-4-1993. 3.After detailed enquires made, a show cause notice dated 11-10-1993 was issued by the Collector to M/s. MIPL and Sh. Subhash Bagaria, Director of M/s. MIPL asking them to show cause as to why - (a) The "Inventory filter material" valued at Rs. 9,68,178/- seized under Section 111(m) of Customs Act, 1962 and duty on differential value amounting to Rs. 3,20,077/- should not be demanded on these goods under Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962 (if goods under BE 009557 intercepted by the officers). (b) Provisional assessment should not be finalised as proposed. (c .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... order reads - "I order the Bill of Entry No. 009557, dated 17-4-1993 be finally assessed adopting the value of USD 5325.80 for the purpose of assessment." This BE No. 009557, dated 17-4-1993, the declared goods are INVENTORY FILTER MATERIAL (MIXTURE OF CELLULOSE ACETATE CELULOSE NITRATE) cleared classification by the Importer under Heading 3920.79, which has been provisionally approved as such. While finalising the assessment of this BE, the Collector should have given an order as regards classification on this BE also, since for assessment classification and valuation, both are to be determined and classification of INVENTORY FILTER MATERIAL was under dispute before him. The order therefore for assessment only as regards value for final assessment of the BE is therefore not complete even if the Importer had declared it to be under 3920.79, the same was being disputed by him. (b) We find that the entity under classification dispute is "INVENTORY FILTER MATERIAL". As per the submissions made by the learned advocate and the technical literature produced, the goods are determined to be - Membrane Filter Material is form of Roll Stock of about 1 foot width and 500 feet length .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... , on question from the Bench, admitted during the hearing that 'Filter membrane' or 'Inventory filter material' is nothing but interchangeable names for 'Filter Elements' and the entity under import is admittedly for use as filtering medium. In this view, we have no hesitation in coming to a finding, that the Rolls under import, are excluded by the HSN notes for Parts from being classified under Heading 84.21 relying on HSN head notes, which are binding as per the statutory Rules of Interpretation to Customs Tariff. (c) Once the entity is excluded from Heading 84.21, as claimed by the Importer, we proceed to find out whether it could be classified under Chapter 3920.79 which read as :- "3920 Other plates, sheets, film foil strip, of plastics non celluose and non rediforced, laminated, supplied or similarly combined with other materials; 3920.79 : of other cellulose derivatives". Chapter No. 10 of Chapter 39 reads as :- "10. Heading Nos. 39.20 and 39.21, the expression 'plates, sheets, film, foil and strip' applied only to plates, sheets, film, foil and strip (other than these of chapter 54) and to block of regular geometric shape, whether or not printed or otherwise su .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... under 85.46. These authorities do not consider the specific exclusion clause vide HSN Note under relevant heading for coverage of Parts of 84.21, therefore they are not relevant to determine the classification in this case of the goods under import. (ii) The case of Calame Industries Ltd. - 1998 (100) E.L.T. 379 (Tribunal) is primarily and particularly, designed parts. The entity under import is designed for serving a particular of filtration end use on. However as imported that is running length, it cannot be said to be particularly designed to be part of a filtration equipment machine nor any such evidence is produced as a claim to that end. On the other contrary, it is an admitted position that after imports, the roll is subjected to process of cutting, slitting to achieve specific end use shapes and sizes. Therefore, this case law does not help the appellants claim for classification of the entity under import as parts of 84.21. (iii) The case law in Filter Pharma Lab. Pvt. Ltd. - 2000 (120) E.L.T. 372 is on whether the process of cutting of imported glass micron filter paper and nylon micron filter paper into specific end use sizes would amount to manufacture under the Cen .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... aced by the learned Collector on the SVB (Special Valuation Branch, Madras Customs House) Circular for imports at Bangalore, is not correct in law. While Collector, Bangalore would be exercising the powers of a Proper Officer for determining value as per law, he is not bound by SVB circulars of another Customs House not in his jurisdiction. Such determinations may be relevant evidence for Collector, Bangalore to consider, but cannot be binding on him. Collector, Bangalore should have considered the evidence, as on record, and came to his Independent Determination of the Value. We find that on this very issue, the Southern Regional Bench at Madras in case of M/s. Digital Equipments (India) Ltd. Tribunal Order No. 400/1995 had held : "5. …….The instructions issued by the Special Valuation Branch may be of guidance which might be taken into consideration by the original authority while exercising his independent powers and application of mind as quasi-judicial authority under the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962. But at the same time he cannot abdicate his individual function as an adjudicating authority, while exercising his Quasi Judicial Powers. He has held that because of ins .....

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