2025-VIL-1179-CESTAT-BLR-CU
  1. Home
  2. 2025-VIL-1179-CESTAT-BLR-CU

CUSTOMS CESTAT Cases

Customs – Sections 112 and 114AA of Customs Act, 1962 – Import of graphite blocks – Classification – Appellant had imported Graphite blocks and filed Bill of Entry by classifying goods under CTH 69031010 and claimed concessional rate of duty – On completion of investigation, Adjudicating authority reclassified imported goods under CTH 38011000 and confirmed demand of differential duty along with interest and penalty – Commissioner (Appeals) upheld order of Adjudicating authority – Whether imported Graphite blocks are classifiable under CTH 69031010 as claimed by Appellant or under CTH 38019000 as confirmed by authorities – HELD – From technical write up, it is clear that artificial graphite blocks are manufactured from finely ground coke and carbonaceous binders as explained in HSN notes for Chapter 3801. Appellant had never claimed that graphite blocks are sold as such by them to customers, who could use same in heat resistance applications as ceramic products. On the contrary, imported graphite blocks are necessarily to be processed in factory which could be used in certain high temperature application industries like glass industries, furnaces etc. Imported goods are artificial graphite in blocks and not in form of ‘ceramic products’ which could be used as refractory material directly. Graphite blocks imported by Appellant are rightly classifiable under CTH 38019000 – Appeals disposed of - Recovery of duty – Invoking of extended period of limitation – Whether invocation of extended period of limitation is justified in facts and circumstances of case – HELD – Appellant had initially declared classification of graphite blocks under heading 38019000, but abruptly later changed to CTH 69031010, viz. Magnesia carbon bricks, shapes and graphitised alumina. Even though Customs Broker had warned that such classification would invite evasion of customs duty, Appellant had intentionally ignored suggestion of Customs Broker only with an objective to evade payment of duty. In such circumstances, invocation of extended period of limitation for recovery of duty is sustainable - Imposition of penalty – Whether penalty imposed on Appellant under Sections 112 and 114AA of the Act is sustainable – HELD – After knowing fully well that imported product attracts classification under CTH 38019000, Appellant proceeded to resort to mis-declaration of product inspite of specific advice given by Customs Broker, hence, imposition of penalty on Appellant is justified. However, in circumstances of case, penalty imposed on Appellant under Section 114AA of the Act is reduced and penalty imposed under Section 112 of the Act is set aside.
Download File
show more Judgements  

Quick Search

/

Advance Search

GST Resources

/

Gst Rate Finder

Weekly Summary

VIL Video

VILGST-TAX CONNECT WEBINAR
19th July 2025

Create Account

Security-Code
New Code?

Log In

New User ? Forgot Password ?

Forgot Password

Security-Code
New Code?
Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page

Feedback this page

Schedule a Demo

Schedule a demo to know the features and advantages of VILGST portal. Get to know the tips to find the desired results in faster way.

Caselaw Request Form (CRF)

Didn’t find what you are searching for? No worries, please give us the following details and VIL will email you the desired Caselaws at the earliest:

Security-Code
New Code?