Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 1987 (7) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

1987 (7) TMI 264 - AT - Customs

Issues: Assessment of basic customs duty on imported Electrical Noise Testing Equipment under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975.

In this case, the appellants imported Electrical Noise Testing Equipment and sought a lower assessment of basic customs duty. The lower authorities assessed the goods under Heading 90.28(4) read with 90.16(1) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 at 60% basic customs duty. The appellants argued for a 40% assessment by either re-assessing under Heading 90.28(4) read with Heading 90.16(2) or claiming exemption under notification No. 394/76-Customs dated 2-8-1976. Both sides presented their arguments based on the catalogue, with the department contending that the goods were measuring instruments. However, upon careful consideration, the Tribunal found that the goods were actually measuring-cum-checking instruments, combining both functions. This finding was in line with the Collector (Appeals) decision as well.

The Tribunal ruled that since Heading No. 90.16(2) only covers checking instruments and the goods in question were measuring-cum-checking instruments, they could not fall under Heading 90.16(2). The appellants also tried to rely on the new Harmonised Customs Tariff that came into force later, but the Tribunal noted that the goods were imported before this new tariff, making the reliance on it irrelevant. Additionally, the Tribunal addressed the appellants' plea for exemption under notification No. 394/76-Customs, stating that while the notification covered measuring instruments and measuring-cum-checking instruments falling under Heading 90.16 (non-electrical type), the appellants' goods were electrical and fell under Heading 90.28, not specified in the notification. The Tribunal emphasized that the exemption notification had to be strictly construed, and the rate entry against Heading 90.28(4) did not automatically extend the exemption to these goods.

Ultimately, the Tribunal confirmed the assessment made by the lower authorities and dismissed the appeal, upholding the 60% basic customs duty on the imported Electrical Noise Testing Equipment.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates