Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2023 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (5) TMI 452 - AT - CustomsExemption from CVD and SAD - silver findings which are parts of silver jewellery - N/N. 12/2012-CE dated 17.03.2012 and N/N. 21/2012-CUS dated 17.03.2012 - HELD THAT:- Identical issue was examined at length and decided in M/S. KINJAL PRECIOUS PVT. LTD., M/S. SUMANGALAM GOLD CREATIONS PVT. LTD., M/S. LALITA JEWELLERS, M/S. IRA JEWELS, M/S. PP ALLOYS AND FINDINGS SUPPLIERS AND M/S. DEREWALA INDUSTRIES LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER, CUSTOMS, JAIPUR [2023 (2) TMI 1100 - CESTAT NEW DELHI] where it was held that An exemption notification has to be strictly construed and the burden of proving that the case falls within the parameters of the exemption clause or the exemption notification is on the assessee; and if there is any ambiguity in the notification which is subject to strict interpretation, the benefit of such ambiguity cannot be claimed by the assessee and it must be interpreted in favour of the revenue. It was also held in the said case that Similar would be the position with regard to the SAD exemption notification. Entry at serial no. 78 of Chapter heading 7113 describes the goods as articles of jewellery and not as parts of articles of jewellery. The Commissioner (Appeals) has recorded a finding that since they are different articles, an assessee cannot claim the benefit of SAD exemption notification on import of parts of articles of jewellery. The finding recorded by the Additional Commissioner and the Commissioner (Appeals), therefore, does not suffer from any legality. Respectfully following the decision of this Tribunal in Kinjal Precious Pvt. Ltd., impugned order is upheld - appeal dismissed.
|