2025-VIL-1902-CESTAT-CHE-CU

CUSTOMS CESTAT Cases

Customs – Section 28 of Customs Act, 1962 – Demand of differential duty – Bar of limitation – Appellant imported external and internal TV tuners by declaring them as computer accessories and classifying them under CTH 8473 3099 – After issuance of show cause notice by invoking extended period of limitation under Section 28 of the Act, Adjudicating Authority classified imported goods under Heading 8528 7100 (reception apparatus for television) and demanded differential duty – Commissioner (Appeals) affirmed order passed by Adjudicating Authority – Whether invoking of extended period of limitation is justified in facts and circumstances of case – HELD – There was a lack of clarity even in department about correct classification of goods. In Appellants own case, Tribunal examined Appellant’s classification of External VGA Board under CTH 8473 3030 as against revenue’s classification under CTH 8529 9090 and held that classification under Chapter 84 is more appropriate than under Chapter 85. When there are genuine disputes over interpreting legal provisions, it is unjustified to apply an extended limitation period simply because assessee's position is considered not bona fide. Under such circumstances, charge of mis-declaration will not hold good and show cause notice could not have invoked extended period. Show cause notice in issue is barred by limitation of time. Once it is held that demand is time barred, there would be no occasion for Tribunal to enquire into merits of issues. Impugned order is set aside – Appeals disposed of

Quick Search

/

Create Account



Log In



Forgot Password


Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page



Feedback this page