Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2024 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (1) TMI 590 - AT - CustomsChange of classification of goods imported by the appellant - Non-declaration of MRP - Applicability of Notification 9 of 2010 CE (NT) dated 27.02.2010 which amends notification no. 49/2008 Central Excise NT dated 24.12.2008 - Suppression of facts or not - penalty - extended period of limitation - HELD THAT:- On perusal of the nature of goods show that radiator, evaporator, condenser or compressor or all essential ingredients refrigeration system and can by no means the called accessories. The decision of Banco Products India Ltd. [2009 (2) TMI 101 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD] is different sides of facts. In the said case the goods in dispute were not essential ingredients of the final product. Penalty - suppression of facts or not - HELD THAT:- There was no mis-declaration of description. He argued that in these circumstances, penalty should not be imposed. We find that penalty of Rs.50,000/- has been imposed under section 114 AA of the Customs Act, 1962. The penalty of Rs. 50,000/- has been also imposed under section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. Extended period of Limitation - HELD THAT:- The show cause notice has been issued on 13.04.2018 whereas, the bill of entries are dated 26.07.2016 to 13.08.2016. It is seen that all the data required for the notice except the MRP was available in the bill of entry filed by the appellant. In these circumstances, there are no reason to hold that anything was suppressed by the appellant for the purpose of evasion. The description of the goods the heading in which classification has been claimed and the rate of duty for the purpose of CVD and the value for the purpose of CVD are all available on the bill of entries - it is not found that revenue has been able to establish the case for revocation of extended period of limitation. The extended period of limitation could not have been involved in the instance case. This appeal is therefore allowed on the ground of limitation.
|