Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + HC Customs - 2017 (3) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (3) TMI 1276 - HC - CustomsLevy of ADE - Apparel Export Promotion Council - export performance certificate - the goods which were imported by the appellant were diverted to the domestic market and thereby, ended up violating the conditions of import - appellant's case is that the Settlement Commission could not have imposed ADE upon it - N/N. 21/2002, dated 01.03.2002 - Held that: - the said notification which is issued u/s 25 of the Act, exempts, so much of additional duty which is leviable under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the CTA, which is in excess of the rate specified in the corresponding entry in column 5 of the table appended to the said notification. Section 3 (1) of the CTA speaks about excise duty. The entry 410 in Column 5 of the table appended to Notification No.21/2002, dated 01.03.2002, restricts the duty to 16% - ADE, which is in the nature of excise duty is the additional duty, which, if imposed will take it beyond the consolidated rate of 16% in terms of N/N. 21/2002, dated 01.03.2002, as CVD, at the rate of 16% is already imposed. Which of the two duties is to be levied, i.e., ADE or SAD? - Held that: - Since, ADE is exempted, quite clearly, the respondents were entitled to levy SAD, as was indicated, initially. ADE could be sourced to Section 3(5) of CTA, in our view, is also erroneous for the following reasons : First, ADE is in the nature of excise duty leviable under the 1957 of the Act. Its an imposition in the form of additional duty on articles imported into India and is traceable to Section 3(1) of CTA, and not, to Section 3(5) of CTA. A plain reading of Section 3(5) of CTA would show that additional duty on the imported articles, is levied to counter-balance Sales Tax, Value Added Tax, Local Tax, or other charges for the time being levied on a like article upon on its sale, purchase, or transportation in India which cannot be imposed at the rate exceeding 4%. Clearly, therefore, the justification provided for levy of ADE at the rate of 8% under Section 3(5) of CTA, cannot be sustained. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant-assessee.
|