9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (11) TMI 599X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s duty. The appellant cleared these consignments by paying additional customs duty at the concessional rate of 4% under Notification No. 6/2006-C.E, dated 1-3-2006 [Sl. No. 17 (ii)], as amended by Notification No. 12/2010-C.E., dated 27-2-2010. During the period prior to 27-2-2010, all the items mentioned in Sl. No. 17 of the table to Notification No. 6/2006-C.E., including USB flash memory, were fully exempt from Central Excise duty. By Notification No. 12/2010-C.E., dated 27-2-2010, two categories were carved out for exemption under Sl. No. 17 - first category was of the items "meant for fitment inside CPU housing/laptop body only" and for this category, the rate of duty was nil and the second category was for the items meant for "externa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt under Section 112 of Customs Act, 1962. These show cause notices were adjudicated by the Commissioner vide order-in-original No. 1/UKG/2011 dated 25-5-2011 by which the duty demands as raised in the show cause notices were confirmed against the appellant along with interest and beside this, total penalty of Rs. 10,40,000/- was imposed on the appellant under Section 112 of Customs Act, 1962. 1.2 Against this order of Commissioner (Appeals), this appeal alongwith the stay application has been filed. 2. Heard both the sides in respect of stay application. 2.1 Shri R. Madhav Rao, Advocate, the learned Counsel for the appellant, pleaded that the goods imported - Memory Stick, SD Cards and Micro SD Cards are solid state non v ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the Notification No. 6/2006-C.E. He, therefore, pleaded that this is not the case for waiver from the requirement of pre-deposit. 3. We have carefully considered the submissions from both the sides and perused the records. 4. The dispute in this case is only about the rate of additional Customs duty which is equal to the effective rate of Central Excise duty chargeable on like goods produced or manufactured in India. The Sl. No. 17 of the table to the Notification No. 6/2006-C.E. as it existed during the period of dispute is reproduced below :- Sl. No. Chapter/ Sub- Heading etc. Description of the goods Rate Condition (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) "17. 8471 70 The following goods, namely :- ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... side the CPU Housing/laptop body only". The absence of the word "only" in Sl. No. 17(ii) indicates that even the items covered in this Sl. No., which in addition to being used for external use with a computer or laptop as plugin device, can be used with Camera or mobile phones, would also covered by this entry. The scope of the entry against Sl. No. 17(ii) of the table to the Notification as it stood during the period of dispute, cannot be interpreted on the basis of the wordings of the entry as the same stood w.e.f. 7-5-2010. 5. We are, therefore, of the view that the appellant have prima facie case in their favour and the requirement of pre-deposit of duty demand, interest and penalty would cause undue hardship. The requirement of p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
