2026-VIL-1546-CESTAT-KOL-CU
  1. Home
  2. 2026-VIL-1546-CESTAT-KOL-CU

CUSTOMS CESTAT Cases

Customs – Tariff classification of mixed lot polyester warp knitted fabrics – Appellant imported mixed lot polyester warp knitted fabrics from foreign suppliers under five Bills of Entry and classified the goods under Tariff Item 6005 9000 claiming concessional Basic Customs Duty at 10 per cent under Notification No. 82/2017-Customs. The Revenue rejected the classification and proposed reclassification under Tariff Items 6005 3500 to 6006 3900 as warp knitted fabrics of synthetic fibres, demanding differential duty with penalties under Sections 114A and 114AA of Customs Act, 1962 - Whether the Revenue established that the appellant's classification is incorrect by adducing requisite technical and scientific evidence before reclassifying the goods – HELD – It is a settled position that the burden to prove that classification adopted by importer is incorrect lies upon Revenue and mere suspicion is insufficient. Classification under Chapter 60 depends upon fibre composition, weight, predominance, textile construction etc. which cannot be determined from invoice, packing list or visual examination alone. The term polyester warp knitted fabrics does not prove that the fabric is made up of 100 per cent polyester as the weft can be made up of any other material, thus mixed lot of fibres cannot automatically be treated as 100 per cent synthetic unless fibre composition is scientifically determined. The Revenue failed to produce Test reports, Technical literature, Textile Committee opinion, Expert witness, Chemical Examiner's report, Market enquiry, Manufacturer's specification, Fibre composition, Yarn composition, GSM analysis or any other laboratory report in support of allegation of mis-classification. No samples were drawn to ascertain constituent material or fibre content. The Proper Officer examined goods and accepted the classification without raising any objection and the assessment attained finality as it was not challenged. The Revenue failed to bring fresh evidence to allege mis-declaration. Reclassification without fresh evidence is legally not sustainable. In absence of any cogent or corroborative evidence available on record to dispute the classification claimed by Appellant under Tariff Item 6005 9000, the classification is upheld and the appellant is eligible for benefit of concessional rate of Basic Customs Duty under Serial No. 166 of Notification No. 82/2017-Customs - The differential duty demand of Rs.39,12,198/- together with applicable interest is set aside - The penalties imposed under Sections 114A and 114AA are set aside – The appeal is allowed with consequential relief
Download File

Quick Search

/

Advance Search

GST Resources

/

Gst Rate Finder

Tax Vista

Your Weekly Tax Recap

By Kasi Viswanathan V

Weekly Summary

VIL Video

GST Critical issues: ITC on...
By CA Vivek Jalan

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

Security-Code
New Code?

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.

Security-Code
New Code?

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?