Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2023 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (9) TMI 463 - AT - CustomsLevy of Social Welfare Surcharge (SWS) - Determination of SWS where basic customs duty is NIL - Appellant claimed exemption from customs duty provided under N/N. 24/2015-Cus. dated 08.04.2015 by producing Merchandise Export from India Scheme (MEIS) scrips - Case of Revenue is that since the customs duty was paid by the appellant through MEIS scrip, it was liable to pay 10% of the amount of BCD, representing the SWS - HELD THAT:- The benefit under MEIS scheme will be restricted upto Rs.1 lakh, which is commensurate to the volume of export achieved by the scrip holder. To ensure that the benefit under the MEIS is subject to achievement of the export obligation, though the Central Government has exempted the goods, vide notification dated 08.04.2015 - Relevance of the condition is to the effect that, though the goods imported under MEIS scrip are exempted from payment of customs duty, but to ensure that the incentive is within the permissible limit, the devise of maintaining the records have been prescribed therein. Such maintenance of records is in context with the Foreign Trade Policy, which have to be monitored by the agencies empowered under such policy i.e., the Ministry of Commerce, through the Director General of Foreign Trade. In the present case, it is not in dispute that the licensing authority has raised any objection with regard to non-observance or nonfulfillment of the conditions mentioned in the notification dated 08.04.2015. Thus, it would not be proper on the part of the authorities to say that debit of customs duty in the MEIS scrip would disentitle the imported goods from the claim of the benefit of ‘Zero’ rate SWS. Since, the effective rate of the customs duty is ‘NIL’ or ‘Zero’, by virtue of the notification dated 08.04.2015, the rate of SWS would automatically become ‘zero’, inasmuch as SWS is to be calculated not on the value of the goods, but on the duty of customs levied on the imported goods, which is evident from sub-section (3) of Section 110 of the Finance Act, 2018. The said statue has mandated that SWS levied under Sub-section (1) of Section 110, shall be calculated at the rate of 10% on the customs duty levied and collected by the Central Government. In the present case, since no customs duty is leviable in terms of notification dated 08.04.2015, there is no question of payment of SWS. On account of the BCD having been wholly exempted vide notification dated 08.04.2015, the calculation of SWS @ 10% of the basic customs duty would also be ‘zero’ only. Thus, in effect, it is clarified that there is no SWS which needs to be paid by the importer-appellant. Review Petitions against the judgement of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court it the case of LA TIM SOURCING (INDIA) PVT. LTD., LA TIM LIFESTYLE & RESORTS LTD., GOPANI IRON & POWER (INDIA) PVT. LTD. VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS [2019 (10) TMI 506 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] and LA TIM METAL & INDUSTRIES LIMITED VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. [2022 (11) TMI 1099 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] - No satisfactory explanation was furnished by the learned AR. Further, it is also found that though he has submitted that the Review Petitions have been filed before the Hon’ble Court, but no copy of such petitions were placed before the Bench. Since, the said judgements are in operation, this Tribunal is bound to follow the ratio decided therein. There are no merits in the impugned orders passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) - impugned orders set aside - appeal allowed.
|