Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2018 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (6) TMI 21 - AT - CustomsGrant of registration for the project - Classification - custom duty demand - Project import - project relating to Water Supply project - appellants to be granted registration when they are not direct party to the import contract ? - registration denied no contract between the importer and the supplier and that the project is an irrigation project and not a water supply project - Held that:- The regulation does not require the importer to enter into contract with foreign supplier. It merely require existence of a contract under which imports are made - If the Project Import Regulation 1986 do not mandate any such condition the same can not be imposed by the terms of Customs Manual - The Project can be registered under the regulation by the Appellants even if the appellants are not a direct party to import contract. Classification of projects - project relating to ‘Water Conductor System’ - Difference between irrigation project and water supply project - whether the items imported by them are classifiable as Irrigation project under heading 98010012 or as Water Supply Projects notified vide N/N. 42/96 –Cusdt 23.7.96 under heading 98010019? - N/N. 14/2004-Custom dated 8.1.2004 - Held that:- This ‘Water Conductor System’ only relates to the lifting of water from one point and through pump houses and pipelines supplying to the recipient tanks at destination. Thus the entire project may be of Irrigation, but the part we are dealing with is only related to movement and lifting of water from one point to another. Thus it cannot be called an irrigation project but it can only be called a Water Supply project in that sense. Revenue has argued that since the project of the appellant is just lifting and supplying the water the same is not covered by the said expression. Revenue has relied on the decision of Tribunal in case of Pratibha Industries [2004 (9) TMI 278 - CESTAT, MUMBAI] - Held that:- It is seen that the facts in the said case are significantly different. In the said case the goods imported were not machineries but were pipes and therefore they were not covered under chapter heading 9801. In the instant case the goods imported are machineries and term ‘Water Supply Project’ has been described in the explanation. Thus the facts of case are different. Revenue also argued that even if it is a water supply project it would merit classification as Irrigation project as it is part of an irrigation project - Held that:- the entire irrigation project has not been imported. Just one component of the irrigation project has been imported therefore the ratio of the said decision does not apply - Had the complete irrigation project been imported then all components forming part of the irrigation projects would have been classified as irrigation project. Benefit of N/N. 14/2004-Custom dated 8.1.2004 - Held that:- Since the project is classifiable as ‘Water Supply Project’ the benefit of the notification 14/2004-Cus will also be available. Appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.
|