Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal

Touchwood Industries vs Delhi-Iv on 20 February, 2020

CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
                    CHANDIGARH
                     REGIONAL BENCH - COURT NO. I

                   Customs Appeal No. 3145 of 2012

 [Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. 89/CUS/APPL/DLH-IV/2012 dated 09.08.2012
 passed by the Commissioner of CE, (Appeals), Delhi-IV, Faridabad]



 Touchwood Industries                                      ......Appellant
 487/18, Peera Garhi, Rohtak Road,
 New Delhi

                                 VERSUS

 Commissioner of Customs, Delhi-IV                         ......Respondent
 Inland Container Depot, Tughlakabad, New Delhi


 APPEARANCE:

 Present for the Appellant: None / On merits
 Present for the Respondent: Mr. Bhasha Ram & Mr. Amandeep Kumar, ARs


 CORAM:       HON'BLE MR. S. S. GARG, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)
     HON'BLE MR. SANJIV SRIVASTAVA, MEMBER (TECHNICAL)



                    FINAL ORDER NO. 60214/2020


                                                  DATE OF HEARING: 18.02.2020
                                               DATE OF DECISION: 20.02.2020



 PER: SANJIV SRIVASTAVA

       This    appeal     is   directed    against      Order-in-Appeal   No.

 89/CUS/APPL/DLH-IV/2012 dated 09.08.2012 of Commissioner of

 Central Excise (Appeals) Delhi-IV, Faridabad.             By the impugned

 order, the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the Order-in-Original No.

 557/DC/ICD/MS/2011 dated 11.02.2011 holding as follows:
                                          2                   Customs Appeal No. 3145 of 2012




      "I order the goods be assessed to duty by classifying the same
      under Customs Tariff heading 49119990."

2.1    The appellant had filed Bill of Entry No. 4921487 dated

14.10.2011 for clearance of goods by describing them as "Educational

Charts" and classification under Custom Tariff Heading 49059990 and

attracting duty at "Nil" rate. They declared the value of the goods as

Rs. 32,89,200/-.


2.2    The goods were subjected to 1st Check examination. The shed

recorded the following examination report:

      "O/E 100% of the goods in the presence of representative of
      CHA and found to contain Educational Charts as per Invoice, P/L
      and B/L. Description and Quantity checked. As far as nature of
      goods is concerned, Historical and Elementary Educational charts
      were found during the examination. Samples put up to group for
      perusal ..."

2.3    After   considering    the   written          submissions       made      by    the

appellant vide his letter dated 04.11.2011, the Deputy Commissioner

adjudicated the matter as per order referred in para 1, supra.


2.4    Aggrieved     the     appellant       filed     the    appeal       before      the

Commissioner       (Appeals),    which        has      been     dismissed        by    the

Commissioner (Appeals) as per the impugned order.


2.5    Aggrieved the appellant have filed this appeal before CESTAT.


3.1    In their appeal, the appellant has assailed the orders of the

lower authorities stating as follows:
                                       3               Customs Appeal No. 3145 of 2012




    The goods imported are educational charts as they impart
       knowledge in respect of elementary learning such as language,
       grammar, numerals, mathematical tables, basic hygiene etc.
       They are in form of single sheet with colour printing on plastic
       bearing the name of publisher. Thus these are printed material
       for educational purposes. Examination report recorded by the
       shed also says so.
    Since the goods are in form of chart containing "Educational
       Material" in printed form the same as per their understanding
       merits classification under heading 49059990. The classification
       made by the lower authorities under Heading 49119990 a is not
       correct as heading 4911 is residuary heading.
    Alternatively the goods imported by them merit classification as
       „Printed Books" under CTH 4901 and exempt from payment of
       duty under Notification No 21/2002-Cus dated 01.03.2002 (Sl
       No 160), since they contain valuable information and material
       for children in printed form having publisher‟s name and satisfy
       the essential attributes of "printed book" such as (i) these are
       available to public at large; (ii) sold at book stores; (iii)
       recognized   internationally       as   Book   and     assigned        ISBN
       (International Standard Book Number)
    The decision of Wilco International [1992 (61) ELT 713 (T)] is
       squarely holding that the goods imported are nothing but
       Books.

4.1    Matter was listed for hearing on 18.02.2020. Appellant‟s

advocates "Piyush Kumar & Associates" have vide their letter dated

17.02.2020 received in the Registry on 17.02.2020, submitted as

follows:

      "In this regard it is respectfully submitted that the above
      mentioned Appellant is hereby submitting written brief of
      arguments for kind perusal of the Hon‟ble Tribunal and therefore
      prays Your Honour for disposal of the matter on the basis of
                                      4            Customs Appeal No. 3145 of 2012




      Memorandum of Appeal as well as brief of arguments, for which
      act of kindness, the appellant shall ever be indebted."

4.2    Thus on we have heard Shri Amandeep Kumar, Authorized

Representative for the Revenue in the matter. We have also

examined the sample of the goods imported by the appellant which

were produced by the Authorized Representative.


4.3    In the written arguments filed by the Advocates for the

appellant, they have reiterated the same grounds as have been

stated by them in the Appeal Memorandum.


4.4    Learned   Authorized    Representative    while     reiterating      the

findings recorded by the lower authorities submitted that:-


   The classification of the goods as per the Custom Tariff is to be
       determined as per the terms of the heading. He referred to the
       terms of headings, 4901, 4905 & 4911 to argue that the goods
       are appropriately classifiable under heading 4911 as has been
       held by the authorities below;
   He also referred to HSN Explanatory Notes for Chapter Heading
       4905 and 4911 and argued that as per the HSN explanatory
       notes for these chapters the goods have been held to be
       appropriately classifiable under CTH 4911. He relied on the
       decision of the Hon‟ble Apex Court in the case of Wood Craft
       Products Ltd [1995 (77) ELT 23 (SC)] and the decision of the
       Mumbai Bench of CESTAT in case of Camlin Ltd [2002 (144)
       ELT 638 (T-Mum)] to establish that reliance placed by him on
       the HSN Explanatory Notes, for the determination of the
       classification of goods under Custom Tariff is justified.
   The exemption claimed by the Appellant under Notification No
       21/2002-Cus is not admissible to them as the goods do not
       satisfy to the basic criteria to be called as goods. The decision
       of tribunal in case of Wilco referred by the Appellant in their
                                            5               Customs Appeal No. 3145 of 2012




       appeal and submissions is distinguishable and not applicable. In
       case of Wilco the goods imported were in fact the books as is
       evident from para 4 and 5 of the said decision.
    In case of Dilip Kumar & Co [2018 (361) ELT 577 (SC)], Hon‟ble
       Supreme Court (Five Member Bench) has clearly laid down that
       the fiscal statue need to be interpreted strictly as per the words
       used in the statue and there is no room for purposive or other
       manner of construction of statue.
        He thus submits that appeal filed merits rejection.

5.1    We have considered the impugned order along with the

submissions made in the appeal, written submissions filed, and the

arguments advanced by the Authorized Representative at the time of

hearing of the appeal.


5.2    The competitive tariff entries under which the Classification has

been claimed by the appellant and determined by the Revenue are

reproduced below:


  4901                PRINTED BOOKS, BROCHURES, LEAFLETS AND SIMILAR PRINTED
                      MATTER, WHETHER OR NOT IN SINGLE SHEETS

  4901 10       -     In single sheets, whether or not folded :

  4901 10 10    ---   Printed books

  4901 10 20    ---   Pamphlets, booklets, brochures, leaflets and similar printed matter

                -     Other

  4901 91 00    --    Dictionaries and encyclopaedias, and serial instalments thereof

  4901 99 00    --    Other

  4905                MAPS AND HYDROGRAPHIC OR SIMILAR CHARTS OF ALL KINDS,
                      INCLUDING ATLASES, WALL MAPS, TOPOGRAPHICAL PLANS AND
                      GLOBES, PRINTED

  4905 10 00    -     Globes

                -     Other
                                            6             Customs Appeal No. 3145 of 2012




  4905 91 00   --    In Book form

  4905 99      --    Other

  4905 99 10   ---   Geographical, hydrological, astronomical maps or charts

  4905 99 90   ---   Other

  4911               OTHER PRINTED MATTER, INCLUDING PRINTED PICTURES AND
                     PHOTOGRAPHS

  4911 10      -     Trade advertising material, commercial catalogues and the like :

  4911 10 10   ---   Posters, printed

  4911 10 20   ---   Commercial catalogues

  4911 10 30   ---   Printed inlay cards

  4911 10 90   ---   Other

               -     Other

  4911 91 00   --    Pictures, designs and photographs

  4911 99      -     Other

  4911 99 10   ---   Hard copy (printed) of computer software

  4911 99 20   ---   Plan and drawings for architectural engineering, industrial,
                     commercial, topographical or similar purposes reproduced with the
                     aid of computer or any other devices

  4911 99 90   ---   Other

5.3    The appellant while filing the Bill of Entry have claimed the

classification of the goods under heading 4905 99 90.                     From the

terms of the entry, it is very clear that heading 4905 is in respect of

the maps and globes and not in respect of the educational charts of

any other type. This is further very clear from the HSN Explanatory

Notes for the heading 4905 which reads as under:


      "This heading covers all printed globes (for example, terrestrial,
      lunar or celestial), maps, charts and plans designed to represent
      the natural or artificial features of countries, town seas, the
      heavens, etc., conventional signs being used to indicate contours
                                          7               Customs Appeal No. 3145 of 2012




      etc. Maps and charts incorporating advertising matter remain
      classified in this heading.
      This heading includes, inter alia:
      Geographical maps (including sectors for globes), road maps,
      wall maps, atlases, hydrographic, geographical and astronomical
      charts, geological surveys, topographical plans (e.g. plans of
      town or districts)
      It also covers printed globes with internal lighting, provided they
      are not merely toys"


5.4    It is very clear from the examination report and the sample

charts produced before us that these charts are not in nature of maps

or depicting the terrestrial features. Even appellant on the Bill of

Entry have not claimed that these goods are maps of any kind. When

it is not even the case of the importers that the imported goods are

maps,       then   they   are   definitely    not   justified   in   claiming      the

classification under heading 4905. Hence their claim for classification

under heading 4905 99 90 has been rightly rejected by the lower

authorities. While rejecting the claim of classification under 4905 99

90, the Commissioner (Appeals) in para 8 of the impugned order

observed as follows:


      "8.      I find that it is an admitted fact on record that the
      impugned      imported     goods       were   educational      charts     which
      imparted knowledge in respect of elementary learning such as
      language, grammar, mathematical, botanical, zoological, basic
      hygiene etc., and the said charts were printed single sheets and
      were not in bound form or with a binder. So far as appellants
      plea for classification of the above educational charts under
      Custom Tariff Heading 4905 (Sub-Heading 4905 99 90), is
      concerned, I find that Customs Tariff Heading 4905 covers maps
      and hydrographic or similar charts of all kinds, including atlases,
                                     8            Customs Appeal No. 3145 of 2012




      wall maps, topographical plans and globes, printed and as per
      HSN Explanatory Notes, Chapter Heading 4905 covers all printed
      globes (for example, terrestrial, lunar or celestial), maps, charts
      and plans designed to represent the natural or artificial features
      of countries, town seas, the heavens, etc. conventional signs
      being used to indicate contours etc, therefore the basic purpose
      of maps, chart, plans as covered under above Chapter 4905, is
      to represent the natural or artificial feature of countries, town,
      seas, the heavens etc., and I agree with the Adjudicating
      Authority that the classification of the impugned educational
      charts under Customs Chapter Heading 4905 Heading is not
      proper."


5.5    The alternative claim of the appellant that the goods in question

should be classified under heading 4901 as printed books and the

benefit of exemption and the benefit of exemption at S No 160 of

Notification No. 21/2002-Cus dated 01.03.2002 should be allowed to

them has been rejected by the Commissioner (Appeals) stating as

follows:

      "9.     So far as classification of the impugned educational
      charts under Customs Tariff Heading 4901 as "Printed Books" as
      claimed by the Appellants, is concerned, I find that as per HSN
      Explanatory Notes, Chapter Heading 4901 cover Books and
      Booklets consisting essentially of textual matter of any kind, and
      printed in any language or characters, including, Braille or
      shorthand but in the instant case the subject goods printed
      educational charts contained pictures etc being the main material
      instead of text. Further the benefit of Notification No 21/2002-
      Cus dated 01.03.2002 as amended, is available to the printed
      books and printed manuals in bound form or in loose leaf form
      with a binder and I agree with the Adjudicating authority that the
      benefit of above Notification No 21/2002-Cus dated 01.03.2002
      is not available to the impugned goods as the said goods were
                                     9            Customs Appeal No. 3145 of 2012




    simply printed single sheets and were not in bound form or with
    a binder. Therefore the classification of the impugned goods as
    "printed Books" is not at all justified as rightly held in the
    impugned Order in Original. The judgement of the Hon‟ble
    CESTAT in the case of Wilco International reported as 1992 (61)
    ELT 713 (T) as relied upon by the appellants has already been
    discussed by in the impugned Order in Original and I agree with
    the Adjudicating Authority that the above judgement is not
    applicable to the present case."


The decision of the Tribunal in case of Wilco International - 1992

(61) ELT 713 (Tribunal) is not an authority where the classification

of the goods under Custom Tariff was the issue. In the said case, the

goods imported were actually in the form of Books as is evident from

para 3, 4 and 5 of the said decision reproduced below:

    "3.      Shri J C Patel, the Ld. Advocate on behalf of appellants, at
    the outset, indicated that he is not challenging the order passed
    by the Additional Collector with regard to the classification under
    Customs Tariff Act for the purpose of assessment of duty. He is
    only challenging that part of the order holding that the goods
    imported are toys and is a consumer item hit by Serial No. 172
    of Appendix 2B. In other words he stated that his challenge in
    the appeal is only against the order of confiscation for ITC
    violation and imposition of penalty. He also stated that he would
    seek for permission only to re-ship the goods without fine an
    penalty.
    4.       Thereupon he argued on the merit of the appeal with
    regard to the ITC angle. His arguments can be summed up as
    below:
    5.       The item imported is Robert Dunken‟s Jungle Book which
    contains board pages of "press out models" which are to be
    taken out as per the instructions contained in the books. They
                                               10                      Customs Appeal No. 3145 of 2012




      are to be assembled into the models by the children. He showed
      us the sample of the disputed item"

It is settled authority that any decision passed by the statutory

authority, is limited to the issue considered and decided by us. When

the issue of classification of the goods in dispute was not an issue

before the bench then this decision cannot be an authority on the

subject.


5.6    Hon‟ble Supreme Court in case of Dilip Kumar & Company -

2018 (361) ELT 577 (S.C.) has laid down the principles of

interpretation of fiscal statues and notifications issued under these

statues as follows:

      "25. We are not suggesting that literal rule de hors the strict
      interpretation      nor     one       should            ignore       to      ascertain        the
      interplay       between           „strict         interpretation‟             and       „literal
      interpretation‟.           We      may            reiterate          at     the     cost       of
      repetition that strict interpretation of a statute certainly involves
      literal or plain meaning test. The other tools of interpretation,
      namely      contextual           or     purposive interpretation cannot be
      applied nor any resort be made to                       look    to        other   supporting
      material,    especially          in taxation            statutes.           Indeed,      it    is
      well   settled      that    in     a taxation statute, there is no room for
      any intendment; that             regard          must      be     had        to   the      clear
      meaning      of   the words and that the matter should be governed
      wholly by the language of the notification. Equity has no place in
      interpretation of a tax statute. Strictly one has to look to the
      language        used;      there            is      no         room         for     searching
      intendment        nor      drawing           any         presumption. Furthermore,
      nothing     has     to     be     read           into    nor      should anything             be
      implied     other    than        essential         inferences while considering a
      taxation statute.
      -------------

11 Customs Appeal No. 3145 of 2012

52. To sum up, we answer the reference holding as under - (1) Exemption notification should be interpreted strictly; the burden of proving applicability would be on the assessee to show that his case comes within the parameters of the exemption clause or exemption notification. (2) When there is ambiguity in exemption notification which is subject to strict interpretation, the benefit of such ambiguity cannot be claimed by the subject/assessee and it must be interpreted in favour of the revenue. (3) The ratio in Sun Export case (supra) is not correct and all the decisions which took similar view as in Sun Export Case (supra) stands over­ruled."

By applying the principles of interpretation laid down by the Hon‟ble Apex Court as stated above, we are not in position to uphold the contention of the appellant in respect of admissibility of exemption under Notification No. 21/2002-Cus dated 01.03.2002. 5.7 While upholding the classification of the impugned goods under Heading 4911 99 90, the Commissioner (Appeals) in para 10 of her order has observed as follows:

"10. So far as classification of the impugned goods under Customs Tariff Heading 4911 as ordered in the impugned Order in Original is concerned, I find that Chapter Heading 4911 covers "other printed matter, including printed pictures and photographs"" and as per HSN explanatory Notes, Chapter 4911 covers Anatomical, Botanical etc, instrumental charts and diagrams. In the instant case also the impugned educational charts contained pictures for imparting knowledge in respect of elementary learning such as language,. Grammar, mathematical botanical, zoological, basic hygiene etc. and hence the said goods are rightly classifiable under Chapter Heading 4911 99 90 as ordered in the impugned Order in Original. Conclusively, I do 12 Customs Appeal No. 3145 of 2012 not see any legal infirmity in the impugned Order in Original which I legally sustainable and does not call to any interference."

5.8 We do not find any infirmity in the impugned order determining the classification of the impugned goods under Heading 4911 99 90, which is based on the terms of headings in Customs Tariff and HSN Explanatory Notes for the said heading. However to determine the practice of assessment elsewhere a bit of research undertaken by us made us lay hand on the import data available in respect of the same goods at "zuaba. com" which were cleared from the ICD Tughlakabad and Nhava Sheva Port classifying the said goods in same manner. The data downloaded is reproduced in table below:

Date CTH Port Description COO NO's Unit Total Price Price 16.2.15 49119990 ICD Educational Charts (Big) China 161000 8.64 1390725.39 TKD 16.2.15 49119990 Educational Charts (Small) China 126000 4.32 544196.89 16.2.15 49119990 Educational Charts (Small) China 1000 4.32 4319.02 29.2.16 49119990 Nhava Equivalent Fractions Chart USA 10 35 348 Sheva (Grade 4) (School Supplies) 29.2.16 49119990 Fish Chart (Grade 3) (School USA 93 42 3,886 Supplies) 29.2.16 49119990 Wipe Off Venn Diagram USA 10 59 592 Chart (Grade 4) (School Supplies) 29.2.16 49119990 Angles Chart (Grade 6 ) USA 7 35 244 (School Supplies) 29.2.16 49119990 Construction Chart (Grade 2) USA 107 35 3,726 (School Supplies) 29.2.16 49119990 Dictionary Learning Chart USA 10 35 348 (Grade 4) (School Supplies) 29.2.16 49119990 Exploring Reptiles Chart USA 10 42 418 (Grade 4) (School Supplies) 29.2.16 49119990 Healthy Habits Chart (Grade USA 93 348 32,382
3) (School Supplies) 29.2.16 49119990 Parts Of A Story Chart USA 10 35 348 (Grade 4) (School Supplies) 13 Customs Appeal No. 3145 of 2012 29.2.16 49119990 Writing A Research Report USA 42 35 1,462 Chart (Grade 5) (School Supplies) 29.2.16 49119990 Birds Chart (Grade 3) USA 93 42 3,886 (School Supplies) 29.2.16 49119990 Elements Of Friction Chart USA 10 77 766 (Grade 4) (School Supplies) 29.2.16 49119990 Insects Chart (Grade 2) USA 107 35 3,726 (School Supplies) 29.2.16 49119990 Mammals Chart (Grade 2) USA 107 35 3,726 (School Supplies) 29.2.16 49119990 Preposition Chart (Grade 5) USA 42 35 1,462 (School Supplies) 29.2.16 49119990 Proofreading Chart (Grade USA 42 35 1,462
5) (School Supplies) 29.2.16 49119990 Wipe Off Venn Diagram USA 16 59 947 Chart (Grade 7) (School Supplies) 29.2.16 49119990 Exploring Amphibians Chart USA 10 42 418 (Grade 4) (School Supplies) 29.2.16 49119990 Hieroglyphics Chart (Grade USA 42 35 1,462
5) (School Supplies) 29.2.16 49119990 Literary Genres Chart USA 7 268 1,877 (Grade 6) (School Supplies) 5.9 Hence we do not find merits in the appeal filed by the appellants.
6.1 The appeal is dismissed.

(Order pronounced in the court on 20.02.2020) (S. S. GARG) MEMBER (JUDICIAL) (SANJIV SRIVASTAVA) MEMBER (TECHNICAL) RA_Saifi