2025 (4) TMI 829 - AT - Customs

Classification of imported goods - Clear Float Glass - whether the product should be classified under Customs Tariff Heading (CTH) 7005 1090 as claimed by the appellant or under CTH 7005 2990 as determined by the Revenue? - benefit of N/N. 46/2011-Cus dated 01.06.2011 - HELD THAT - The appellant had placed on record the decision by this Tribunal in their own case wherein the impugned products were classified under Chapter Heading 7005 1090. The Tribunal in M/S. SWASTIK SAFETY GLASS (BANGALORE) PVT. LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS CHENNAI 2024 (10) TMI 334 - CESTAT CHENNAI where it is held that the imported Clear Float Glass is classifiable under CTH 70051090 making the appellant eligible for the FTA benefit under Notification No. 46/2011-Cus. The invocation of the extended period for demand of duty and penalties was not justified. Conclusion - The Clear Float Glass imported by the appellant is classifiable under CTH 7005 1090 and not CTH 7005 2990. The appellant is entitled to the benefit of N/N. 46/2011-Cus subject to compliance with the relevant conditions. Appeal allowed.

Summary

ISSUES PRESENTED and CONSIDERED

The primary issue in this case revolves around the classification of "Clear Float Glass" imported by the appellant. The core legal question is whether the product should be classified under Customs Tariff Heading (CTH) 7005 1090, as claimed by the appellant, or under CTH 7005 2990, as determined by the Revenue. Additionally, the applicability of the benefit of Notification No. 46/2011-Cus dated 01.06.2011 to the imported goods is also under consideration.

ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS

Classification of Clear Float Glass

Relevant legal framework and precedents: The classification dispute hinges on the interpretation of Chapter 70 of the Customs Tariff Act, particularly Chapter Note 2(c), which defines the term "absorbent, reflecting or non-reflecting layer" as a microscopically thin coating of metal or chemical compound that absorbs or reflects light while allowing transparency or translucency. The appellant relies on previous tribunal decisions, including those of the Kolkata and Chennai Tribunals, which have classified similar products under CTH 7005 1090.

Court's interpretation and reasoning: The Tribunal examined the manufacturing process of Clear Float Glass, which involves a layer of tin forming on one side during production. The Court noted that this tin layer qualifies as an "absorbent, reflecting or non-reflecting layer" as per Chapter Note 2(c). The Tribunal also observed that the presence of this layer is not disputed, and previous test reports from CSIR-CGCRI confirmed its existence.

Key evidence and findings: The Tribunal considered the manufacturing process, which involves feeding molten glass into a tin bath, resulting in a tin layer on one side. Test reports from CSIR-CGCRI confirmed the presence of this layer as absorbent and non-reflective. The Tribunal also noted that domestic manufacturers classify similar products under CTH 7005 1090, further supporting the appellant's position.

Application of law to facts: The Tribunal applied Chapter Note 2(c) to the facts, concluding that the tin layer on the Clear Float Glass meets the criteria for classification under CTH 7005 1090. The Tribunal rejected the Revenue's argument that the layer must be on a specific side of the glass or applied through a separate coating process.

Treatment of competing arguments: The Tribunal considered the Revenue's reliance on a Board Circular, which suggested classification under CTH 7005 2990 due to the absence of additional metal oxide layers. However, the Tribunal found this interpretation inconsistent with the statutory framework and the established presence of the tin layer.

Conclusions: The Tribunal concluded that the Clear Float Glass imported by the appellant is correctly classifiable under CTH 7005 1090, as it possesses the requisite absorbent layer. Consequently, the appellant is entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 46/2011-Cus, subject to fulfilling the necessary conditions.

SIGNIFICANT HOLDINGS

Preserve verbatim quotes of crucial legal reasoning:

"The expression 'absorbent, reflecting or non-reflecting layer' means a microscopically thin coating of metal or of a chemical compound (for example, metal oxide) which absorbs, for example, infra-red light or improves the reflecting qualities of the glass while still allowing it to retain a degree of transparency or translucency; or which prevents light from being reflected on the surface of the glass."

Core principles established:

The Tribunal reaffirmed the principle that classification under CTH 7005 1090 requires the presence of an absorbent, reflecting, or non-reflecting layer, as defined in Chapter Note 2(c). The Tribunal emphasized that the presence of such a layer does not necessitate a specific side or application method.

Final determinations on each issue:

The Tribunal determined that the Clear Float Glass imported by the appellant is classifiable under CTH 7005 1090 and not CTH 7005 2990. The appellant is entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 46/2011-Cus, subject to compliance with the relevant conditions. The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal with consequential relief as per law.