Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2023 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (11) TMI 69 - CESTAT NEW DELHIAvailability of exemption from the whole of the customs duty by Beetal Teletech under Serial No. 13 of the notification dated 01.03.2005, as amended by notification dated 11.07.2014 - Classification of imported goods - Wireless Access Points WAP / MIMO Product (products having MIMO Technology) - classifiable under Customs Tariff Item CTI 8517 62 90 or not - period from July 2014 to June 2017 - Extended period of limitation. Whether the exclusion clause covers products having only MIMO technology and not working on LTE standard. Exclusion clause (iv) uses the conjunction ‘and’ and, therefore, it can be urged that the scope of clause (iv) can be restricted to those products that have MIMO and LTE both and that the product that only has MIMO technology may, therefore, not be covered by this exclusion clause and, therefore, may not be excluded from the scope of Serial No. 13? HELD THAT:- What needs to be remembered is that MIMO is a technology and cannot be treated as an independent product. If the intention was to exclude even products having only MIMO technology, then the word ‘products’ should have been used after MIMO as well as after LTE. It, therefore, follows that the scope of ‘products’ excluded by entry (iv) would be products which use both MIMO and LTE. Thus, the term ‘Multiple Input/Multiple Output (MIMO) and Long Term Evolution (LTE) Products’ means products which contain both MIMO and LTE. This view finds support from the the decision of Division Bench of the Tribunal in Ingram Micro India [2020 (11) TMI 9 - CESTAT CHENNAI] confirmed the classification of identical product (i.e. WAP) under CTI 8517 62 90 and extended the benefit of the subsequent notification dated 30.07.2017. The Department has accepted the Order passed by the Tribunal. Therefore, once the benefit has been granted to Ingram Micro in the subsequent notification for an identical product, the benefit under the notification dated 01.03.2005, as amended on 11.07.2014 should also be extended to Beetal Teletech. It is also well settled law that an exclusionary clause in an exemption notification should be strictly construed and must be given a narrow meaning so as to not frustrate the intention behind the exemption notification - It has been stated that the investigation by the DRI was not only against Beetal Teletech but few other importers of these goods also and the proceedings initiated against other importers was dropped but appeals have not been filed by the Department. The aforesaid discussion leads to be inevitable conclusion that WAP imported by the appellant works on technology and does not support LTE standard. Ingram Micro was, therefore, justified in claiming exemption from the whole of the customs duty under Serial No. 13 (iv) of the notification. There is, therefore, no infirmity in the order dated 28.11.2019 passed by the Additional Director. The two Customs Appeals filed by the Department, therefore, deserve to be dismissed and are dismissed.
|