9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (3) TMI 1111 - AT - CustomsDemand of duty - Classification of Goods - Imported one consignment of Bed sheet declared as Polyester Bed sheet - willfully mis-declaration of the goods - classifiable under CTH 5407 Or under CTH 6304 - confiscation - penalty - HELD THAT - We find that a similar issue has been examined by this Tribunal in the case Commissioner of Customs (Port) vs. M/s. Silpha Finvest P. Limited 2024 (3) TMI 246 - CESTAT KOLKATA and it was held that merit classification of impugned goods is under CTH 6304 whereas the Revenue wants to classify the same under CTH 5407. As the classification adopted by the adjudicating authority is not sustainable therefore we do not find any merits in the impugned order. Consequently no penalty u/s 114A of the Customs Act 1962 is warranted against the respondent. Therefore we dismiss the appeal filed by the Revenue.
Issues involved: Classification of imported goods under Customs Tariff Headings (CTH) 5407 and 6304, imposition of penalty under Section 114A of the Customs Act, 1962.
Classification Issue: The respondent imported a consignment of 'Bed sheet' declared as Polyester Bed sheet under Bill of Entry No.8244448. The Revenue contended that the goods were 'Polyester Woven Fabrics' classifiable under CTH 5407, while the respondent classified them under CTH 6304. After analysis, the Tribunal found that the goods were Bed spreads/Bed sheets properly classifiable under CTH 6304, not liable for confiscation, and duty was to be paid under this classification. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, upholding the respondent's classification. Penalty Imposition: The Revenue alleged that the respondent willfully mis-declared the goods, seeking a penalty under Section 114A of the Customs Act, 1962. However, the Tribunal noted that the classification adopted by the adjudicating authority was not sustainable. As a result, no penalty under Section 114A was deemed warranted against the respondent. The appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed accordingly. This judgment highlights the importance of accurate classification of imported goods under the appropriate Customs Tariff Headings, as well as the criteria for imposing penalties under the Customs Act, 1962.
|
