1997 (12) TMI 296 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
- Eligibility of imported goods for the benefit of Notification No. 188/87-Cus.

Detailed Analysis:

The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, New Delhi, involved three appeals filed by different appellants, all aggrieved by separate orders-in-original passed by the Collector of Customs, Bangalore. The central issue in all three appeals was the eligibility of the imported goods for the benefit of Notification No. 188/87-Cus., dated 29-4-1987, as amended. The Tribunal decided to address the common issue in all three appeals through a single order due to the similarity of the matter at hand.

During the proceedings, none of the appellants appeared, prompting an adjournment for the day. The goods in question were electronic components declared as resistor-variable (potentiometers) by the appellants, claiming eligibility for a concessional rate of customs duty under the notification. However, the Adjudicating Authority determined that the goods were compact tuning units with mounted Printed Circuit Board variable resistors and brand switches, not falling under the notification's specified categories.

The Tribunal noted discrepancies in the description of the goods in the bill of entries, where they were identified as resistor-variable (potentiometers) but were later found to be compact tuning units with additional components. The appellants argued that even with mounted PCBs and brand switches, the goods should still be considered potentiometers. However, the Tribunal emphasized that the exemption under the notification was strictly for resistors and potentiometers imported as such, excluding units where these components were used.

The appellants contended that the term "potentiometer" was not defined in the Customs Tariff. Technical literature presented by one of the appellants recognized potentiometers as essential components in the electronics industry. Despite references to import policies covering potentiometers with PCB mounting, the Tribunal concluded that the goods did not qualify for the notification's exemption due to the specific description of resistors and potentiometers in the notification.

The Collector of Customs had thoroughly examined the issue, considering product descriptions, technical literature, and the appellants' contentions. It was concluded that the goods were not solely potentiometers, and the appellants had misrepresented the goods to benefit from the notification erroneously. The Tribunal found no substantial grounds to overturn the Adjudicating Authority's decision, affirming the reasonableness of the penalties imposed in all three cases.

In light of the detailed analysis and considerations, the Tribunal rejected all three appeals, upholding the original orders.