TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 1139X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under Heading 8901 - decided in favor of Revenue. The classification of the impugned boat under heading 8903 of CTH have been decided, the refund claim does not sustain on merits. The classification of the impugned boat under CTH 8903 upheld - appeal allowed - decided in favor of Revenue. - C/683/2008-DB, C/2331/2012-DB - Final Order No. 20966-20967/2018 - Dated:- 18-7-2018 - HON'BLE MR. S.S GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER And HON'BLE MR. P. ANJANI KUMAR, TECHNICAL MEMBER Mr. Chandramohan, AR For the Appellant Mr. Abraham, Advocate For the Respondent ORDER Per : P. Anjani Kumar The respondents, M/s. Kingsway Travel Agency Pvt. Ltd., have filed a Bill for Entry No. 150 dated 11.04.2007 for clearance of an Excurs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 21/2002 dated 01.03.2002 S.No. 352 was applicable. Aggrieved by the above said order, the Department is in appeal. The Department has enumerated the following grounds of appeal . (i) on examination of the boat, it was found that the boat is a well-furnished with accessories like carpets, tables, cots with mattresses, refrigerators, heater, micro wave oven, ice boxes, CD players and power generators and hence it was clear that the vessel was not designed for ferrying/transporting passengers on scheduled trips; it was designed for leisure or pleasure boating; the explanatory notes to heading CTH 8901 clearly indicated that the heading covers all vessels for the transport of persons or goods other than vessels of heading 8903, Heading 890 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rist boat ; however, he has failed to appreciate the relevant facts and the judgment of Bombay Bench of the Tribunal cited supra. 4. The learned Commissioner, AR, appearing on behalf of the Department submitted that the Commissioner (A) has allowed the appeal of the respondents on the following grounds which are countered as follows: 4.1 The Commissioner (A) has opined that the classification was changed with assigning any reason whereas the invoice and Bill of Lading described the items as excursion Boats ; it is submitted that the classification was changed only after due examination and only after the importer has agreed with the change of classification; the importer has not filed any contest letter and the duty has not been paid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ding of customs; the classification is to be done in terms of Customs Tariff Act, 1985. 4.3 The Commissioner (A) has opined that the dimension and capacity of the boat were not big and length being 10.7 and breadth 3.3 and the passenger capacity being 15 cannot be considered as a Yacht. It is submitted that the difference between boat and Yacht is not made on the base of size, dimension and capacity etc; the particular boat refers to any floating vessel; any Yacht can also be called a boat; the particular Yacht refers to a pleasure vessel; therefore, Yacht is defined by the purpose and amenities rather than the size; as per the Brochure and literature pertaining to Bayliner Crusier 325 SB , the impugned boat, is equipped with modern ame ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llows: (a) The Heading which provides the most specific description shall be preferred to Headings providing a more general description. However, when two or more Headings each refer to part only of the materials or substances contained in mixed or composite goods or to part only of the items in as set, those Headings are to be regarded as equally specific in relation to those goods, even if one of them gives a more complete or precise description of the goods. (b) Mixtures, composite goods consisting of different materials or made up of different components, and goods put up in sets, which cannot be classified by reference to (a), shall be classified as if any consisted of the material or component which gives them their essential ch ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... used, it is rather important as to how the boat is built which should be a guideline for determining the classification of boat; in fact, we find that the catalogue describes the impugned boat as Bayliner 325 Cruiser and the Bayliner have claimed themselves to be manufacturers and marketers of recreation boats and Cruisers; there is a prima facie evidence that the boat is intended for the luxury uses; we find that the case of Urmila Company Pvt. Ltd cited Supra is similar to the impugned case; we find that Heading 8901 covers the vessels for transport of persons or goods that vessels design primarily for the conveyance of persons or goods are covered by this Heading; it is not the case of the respondents that it was for the conveyance o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
