Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Tej Control Systems Pvt. Ltd vs Commissioner Of Customs, Mumbai on 25 August, 2016
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL WEST ZONAL BENCH AT MUMBAI COURT NO. Appeal No. C/100/05 (Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.795/2004MCH dated 24/12/2004 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) Mumbai ) For approval and signature: Honble Shri Ramesh Nair, Member (Judicial) Honble Shri Raju, Member (Technical) =======================================================
1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see : No the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?
2. Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the : No CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?
3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : Seen of the Order?
4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental : Yes authorities?
======================================================= Tej Control Systems Pvt. Ltd.
:
Appellant VS Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai :
Respondent Appearance None for Appellant Shri Chatru Singh, Assistant Commissioner (A.R) for respondent CORAM:
Honble Shri Ramesh Nair, Member (Judicial) Honble Shri Raju, Member (Technical) Date of hearing : 25/08/2016 Date of pronouncement : 31/08/2016 ORDER NO.
Per : Raju The appellant M/s. Tej Control System Pvt. Ltd. are in appeal against denial of benefit of Notification No. 21/2002-Cus, Sr. No. 244, List 26, Sr. No. 12. Sr. No. 244 of the Notification reads as follows: S.No. Chapter or Heading No. or sub-heading No. Description of goods Standard rate Additional duty rate Condition No. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) 244 84,85 or 90 The goods specified in List 26 15%
-
-
Sr. No. 12 of List 26 reads as follows: List 26 (See S. No. 244 of the Table) (12) Relays of contact rating upto 7 amperes..
The importer had vide their letter dt. 14.5.2004 contended that 9 items under dispute are of Inductive Load less than 7 Amperes though the Resistive Load is more than 7 Amperes as per Catalogue. They stated that they had taken Inductive Load rating for the purpose of their claim of Notification benefit. The goods were of contact rating more than 7 Amperes, the benefit was denied by the lower authorities. Aggrieved by the said order the appellant in appeal before the Tribunal.
2. No one appeared for the appellants. Ld. AR relies on the impugned order.
3. We have gone through the appeal memo, we find that the appellants have admitted that though the Resistive Load by the items is more than 7 Amperes, the Inductive Load is less than 7 Amperes. They have argued that since the Inductive Load is less than 7 Amperes, they are entitled to the benefit of notification which prescribes rating upto 7 Amperes. It is seen that the Sr. No.12 of List 26 does not specify whether the contact rating of upto 7 Amperes is of Inductive or Resistive type. In above circumstances, it would be deemed to cover all kind of contact rating, be it Inductive or Resistive. Since the Resistive rating on the project is above 7 Amperes, they do not fall under Sr. No. 12 of List 26 of the said Notification. In view of above, the appeal is rejected.
(Pronounced in court on 31/08/2016)
(Ramesh Nair)
Member (Judicial)
(Raju)
Member (Technical)
SM.
3
C/100/05