2024(11)LCX0121

Kolkata Tribunal

Anjali Enterprises

Versus

Commissioner of Customs

Customs Appeal No. 75525 of 2021 decided on 26-11-2024

IN THE CUSTOMS

IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
EASTERN ZONAL BENCH : KOLKATA

REGIONAL BENCH – COURT NO. 1

Customs Appeal No. 75525 of 2021

(Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. KOL/CUS(AIRPORT)/AKR/315/2021 dated 23.03.2021 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), 3rd Floor, Custom House, 15/1, Strand Road, Kolkata – 700 001)

M/s. Anjali Enterprises                : Appellant
170/16, NSC Bose Road,
Kolkata – 700 092

                    VERSUS

Commissioner of Customs (Airport & Admn.)        : Respondent
Air Cargo Complex, NSCBI Airport,
Kolkata – 700 052

APPEARANCE:

Shri Tarun Chatterjee, Advocate for the Appellant

Shri Sourabh Chakravorty, Authorized Representative for the Respondent

CORAM:

HON’BLE SHRI R. MURALIDHAR, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)
HON’BLE SHRI K. ANPAZHAKAN, MEMBER (TECHNICAL)

FINAL ORDER NO. 77652 / 2024

DATE OF HEARING: 22.11.2024

DATE OF DECISION: 26.11.2024

ORDER: [PER SHRI R. MURALIDHAR]

    The facts of the case are that the Appellant have imported ‘BAYLAN’ branded water meters and cleared the same under three Bills-of-Entry viz.: Bill of Entry No. 2091114 dated 14.06.2017, Bill-of-Entry No. 6662530 dated 04.06.2018 and Bill-of-Entry No. 6950379 dated 25.06.2018, for home consumption. While clearing the goods for home consumption, they had adopted the Tariff Item No. 9026 10 10 under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, which is subject to ‘nil’ rate of Customs duty.

2. The Department issued a Show Cause Notice subsequently proposing to classify the goods under Tariff Item No. 9028 20 00 under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 wherein the appellant would be required to pay Customs duty at the rate of 7.5%.

3. After due process, the ld. adjudicating authority confirmed the demand, along with applicable interest, and penalty vide Order-in-Original No. KOL/CUS/DC/ACC/66/Gr.II/2019 dated 28.05.2019.

4. On appeal, the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has dismissed the appeal filed by the Appellant vide the impugned order.

4.1. Being aggrieved, the Appellant is before the Tribunal.

5. The Ld. Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has not gone through the brochures and other documentary evidence placed before him while passing the impugned order. He contends that the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has simply relied on the case-law of M/s. Indian Organic Chemicals Ltd. v. Collector of Cus., Bombay [2000 (126) E.L.T. 1033 (Tribunal)]; in the said case, the Tribunal has held as under : -

“Looking to the catalogue and the Notes in the HSN I find that the product is akin to liquid meter as neither in the catalogue nor in the invoice it has been specified that the product apparatus is capable of measuring the flow of liquid per unit of time. Having regard to these facts I hold that the product is a liquid meter classifiable under Chapter sub-heading 9028.20. In the result the appeal is allowed. Consequential relief, if any, shall be admissible to the appeallants in accordance with law.”

5.1. The Ld. Advocate takes us through page 6 of the Order-in-Appeal; at paragraph 10, Table-A gives the details of products classifiable under the Tariff Heading of ‘9026’; it clearly specifies “Instruments and Apparatus for measuring or checking the flow, level pressure or other variables of liquids or gases…”. It is also pointed out that, on the other hand, Tariff Item No. 9028 2000 directly just refers to “Liquid meters”.

5.2. The Ld. Advocate for the Appellant also takes us through the Advisory on ‘Water Meter’ and its applications issued by the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development, Government of India dated 24.06.2020 reproduced at page number 13 (paragraph 2.6) of the grounds of appeal. He submits that the parameters given thereunder under Indian Standard [ISO 4064] are met by the product imported by the Appellant.

5.3. He also takes us through the catalogue/brochure given by the overseas exporter, which is reproduced below: -







He submits that the parameters mentioned therein are clearly meant for ‘water meters’ only.

5.4. In view of these submissions, the Ld. Advocate for the Appellant prays that the present appeal may be allowed.

6. The Ld. Authorized Representative of the Revenue reiterates the findings of the lower authorities and justifies the confirmed demand.

7. On going through the parameters set by the Indian Standards [IS 2401:1973 and ISO 4064] (ref. paragraph 2.6 of the grounds-of-appeal filed), we find that all these parameters are required to be followed for import of ‘water meters’.

8. From the brochure submitted by the Appellant, it is clearly seen that the equipment pertains to water meters only.

9. When the factual details and the documentary evidence produced very clearly point out that the goods are water meters only, we do not see the reason as to why the lower authorities have ignored these documentary evidence and taken the view that the goods would be classifiable under the heading 9028.

10. Therefore, we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal on merits. The Appellant would be eligible for consequential relief, if any, as per law.

( Order pronounced in the open court on 26. 11. 2024 )

Sd/-           
(R. MURALIDHAR)
MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

Sd/-            
(K. ANPAZHAKAN)
MEMBER (TECHNICAL)