9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 555X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al, Authorized signatory of the main appellant. The main appellant imported CFL and filed a bill of entry for clearance of the same through ICD, Jaipur. The appellant claimed concession in customs duty in terms of the Notification No.26/2000-Cus dated 1.3.2000 read with notification no.19/2000 dated 1.3.2000. The concession is available for goods of Sri Lankan origin. The appellants filed the prescribed certificate of origin in terms of India-Srilanka Free Trade Agreement (ISFTA). The said certificates were issued by the designated competent authority in Sri Lanka. The Revenue entertained a doubt as to the correctness of the claim for concessional rate of duty for the impugned goods. It was viewed that the goods were manufactured in China a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orted into Shri Lanka from China in CKD/SKD condition, meriting classification as CFL. Accordingly, the Original Authority held that the AD duty as applicable to the impugned goods, if imported from China, is not liable to be charged in the present case. However, the Original Authority rejected the claim of the appellant for preferential treatment of customs duty under notification no.26/2000-Cus stating that the importer has not fulfilled the conditions specified under Customs Tariff (Determination of origin of goods under the Free Trade Agreement between the Democratic Socialistic Republic of Sri Lanka and the Republic of India) Rules, 2000.The Original Authority disallowed the concessional rate for the impugned goods and confirmed a duty ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntry of the appellants were duty assessed for similar goods from the same exporter and have been cleared on earlier occasions by the Delhi Customs Authorities extending the same conession. (e) The validity and genuineness of the country of origin certificates have again been emphasized by the Designated Authority of Shri Lankan Government vide their letter dated 4.8.2008. (f) The Original Authority fell in error in not considering the scope of Rule 7 of Origin Rules in correct perspective. For the manufacture of CFL a large number of components are required. The said manufacturing process is irreversible. The classification of glass tubes in the same heading as that of impugned goods will itself not make any material difference as CFL wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... contradiction in the findings recorded. After careful examination of the available details, the Original Authority categorically held that the goods were not of Chinese origin and as such, anti-dumping duty cannot be levied on them, which is otherwise leviable if the goods are of Chinese origin. Having recorded thus, the Original Authority proceeded to hold that the appellant is not eligible for preferential rate though admittedly, the goods have originated from Sri Lanka. In other words, the goods were held to be of not Chinese origin and also not of Sri Lankan origin. In other words, we note that it is clear that the question of country of origin of the present goods is left hanging without a finding by the Original Authority. The goods ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
