2025-VIL-2187-CESTAT-DEL-CU

CUSTOMS CESTAT Cases

Customs - Differential Duty, Exemption Notification, Rules of Origin, Certificate of Origin, Regional Value Content (RVC) - The appellant imported Tin Ingots and availed the benefit of Notification No. 46/2011, claiming the goods were of Malaysian origin. The department denied the benefit based on the finding that the Certificates of Origin (COOs) were issued based on false declarations and the goods did not meet the 35% regional value content (RVC) requirement under the ASEAN-India Free Trade Area (AIFTA) rules of origin - Whether the appellant was eligible for the exemption benefit under Notification No. 46/2011 for the imported Tin Ingots - HELD - While the investigation revealed issues with the cost sheets used by the Malaysian exporter (M/s. Malaysia Smelting Corporation) to obtain the COOs, the admitted fact remained that the goods were partially manufactured in Malaysia - The mere issue with the cost sheets did not invalidate the COOs, as there was no evidence produced to prove the COOs were fake - Regarding the RVC requirement, the department did not provide any evidence or calculation to show that the RVC was less than 35% - In the absence of such evidence, the appellant could not be denied the benefit of Notification No. 46/2011 merely based on an allegation of RVC violation - Further, Rule 13 of the AIFTA rules of origin requires the COOs to be issued by the designated government authority, which was complied with in this case - Therefore, the appellant had fulfilled the conditions to avail the exemption benefit under Notification No. 46/2011 and set aside the demand for differential customs duty - The appeal filed by the appellant is allowed

Quick Search

/

Create Account



Log In



Forgot Password


Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page



Feedback this page