TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 847X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... valid defence that acceptance of declaration in a past import is an acknowledgement of declaration having been true and correct. It is not uncommon for importers to align description of imported goods, not with the tariff entries, but with descriptions in exemption notification and continuing with that description until the misdeclaration is unearthed. The differential duty is adequate motive for suppression of facts relevant to assessment. The notice issued to appellant alleges that, in the bills of entry, the description did not bring on record that these drives were portable; no justifiable counter to this allegation has been furnished before the adjudicating authority. The plea of limitation raised before us is, therefore, not tenable. The individuals are equally responsible for the evasion of duty. The imports of the appellants are liable to be classified under 84717030 and not 84717020 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 - appeal rejected - decided against appellant. - C/85678, 85893, 85896 & 85898/2015 - A/90720-90723/16/CB - Dated:- 4-10-2016 - Shri M V Ravindran, Member (Judicial) and Shri C J Mathew, Member (Technical) Shri T. Viswanatha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on various texts, Learned Counsel for appellant contends that hard disk drive is a secondary storage device in automatic data processing machines or computers and that the qualifying expression removable refers to media that can be separated from the drive which the imported hard disks, albeit external, are not amenable to. It was also contended that hard disks may be internal or external just as removable hard disks may be internal or external. Further, describing the external hard disk drive, it was pointed out that external and internal devices differ only in the casing that encloses the former and that the connection to the computer distinguishes the external from the internal and not the removable from the fixed. It is also argued that the imported item is commercially known as hard disk ; as the Drive is fused to the disk in the imported products, it is not amenable to classification as removable or exchangeable. Technical opinion of faculty of reputed technology institutions and that of M/s Seagate International have also been placed before us. 4. Admittedly, the precedents cited on behalf of the appellant are orders of Commissioner (Appeals). It is also claimed that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6) ELT 986 (Tribunal)]. 5. Learned Special Counsel took us through the investigations undertaken by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence and also the grounds on which the adjudicating authority returned his finding of classification. He relied upon the decisions of the Hon ble Supreme Court in Commissioner of Customs, Chennai v. Hewlett Packard India Sales (P) Ltd [2007 (215) ELT 484 (SC); Commissioner of Central Excise, Aurangabad v. Bajaj Auto Ltd [2010 (260) ELT 17 (SC)]; Commissioner of Central Excise, New Delhi v. Connaught Plaza Restaurant (P) Ltd [2012 (286) ELT 321 (SC)]; of the Hon ble High Court of Gujarat in Swati Menthol Allied Chem Ltd v. Jt. Dir., DRI [2014 (304) ELT 21 (Guj.)] and of this Tribunal in Mangalore Refinery Petrochemicals Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, Mangalore; Hitachi Home Life Solution Ltd v. Commissioner of Customs (Import), Nhava Sheva [2012 (285) ELT 504 (Tri.-Mumbai)]; Samsung India Electronics Ltd v. Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi [2014 (307) ELT 160 (Tri.-Del.)]; Commissioner of Customs, Chennai v. Hewlett Packard India Sales (P) Ltd [2007 (215) ELT 484 (SC)]; Nestle India Ltd v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Goa [2008 (2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cel of the statutes of the country enacted by a sovereign legislature representing the citizenry of the country. All statutes are premised on the awareness of the citizenry that such laws exist; it cannot be so premised if technical expertise has, necessarily, to be resorted to for interpretation. To put it succinctly, it is the trade parlance that should determine the proximity to a description if the meaning of the description is not adequately clear. We, therefore, prefer to discard the opinions of technical experts furnished by the appellant. 10. The contention of the appellant that the description in the exemption notification should prevail over the classification numerals, though superficially appealing, is not tenable. Entitlement to the exemption notification follows the primary step of ascertaining the tariff entry. In crossing this hurdle, the most apt description is identified and the classification digits, thereafter, become the standard of identity. The applicability of any notification, being a consequential action, revolves around the classification with the description to further narrow the range. Therefore, products falling under 847170, being the first qualifi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... resort to the internal hard disc. It is not the claim of the appellant that the hard discs imported by them can be attached through an interface with the computer and is capable of functioning on a computer that does not have an internal disc drive. 13. Apparently, the imported disc drives are not pre-loaded with the operating system as to enable usage with any computer that does not have an internal hard disk. Moreover, such portable disc drives are marketed as capable of being used as an external storage of any computer system irrespective of its operating system. That flexibility will, of itself, render its classifiable as a removable hard disc that is distinguished from the fixed internal hard disc. 14. Without doubt, these portable hard disc drives have been imported at different places and at different times; it is also not in dispute that these have been allowed clearance on these occasions. It is the contention of the appellants that these have been examined before clearance and that, with the declaration of portability in the bills of entry, the assessing officers should have re-classified the goods if they had firm grounds for doing so. It is claimed that, in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
