Clear Float Glass with Tin Absorbent Layer Classifiable as Non-Wired Glass with Absorbent/Reflecting Layer: CESTAT [Read Order]

The Chennai Bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) ruled that clear float glass with a tin absorbent layer is classifiable as non-wired glass with an absorbent or reflecting layer under tariff heading 7005 1090, making it eligible for exemption benefits under Notification No. 46/2011.

Float Glass Centre, the appellant, is a regular importer of clear float glass from Malaysia. The goods in question were declared to be classifiable under tariff heading 7005 1090, which covers non-wired glass with an absorbent, reflecting, or non-reflecting layer.

The importer also claimed the benefit of nil basic customs duty under the ASEAN Free Trade Agreement by producing country-of-origin certificates. Customs officers denied the classification and exemption benefit, arguing that the certificates issued by Malaysian authorities mentioned tariff code 7005 2990.

To avoid demurrage charges, the importer filed bills of entry under protest under 7005 2990 and later appealed. TheCommissioner of Customs (Appeals) upheld the denial, leading to further appeal before the Tribunal.

The appellant’s counsel argued that the imported glass had a thin tin absorbent layer, which was confirmed by test reports from CSIR-CGCRI, Kolkata. They further argued that earlier consignments of the same goods had been provisionally assessed and finally classified under 7005 1090, and that several Tribunal benches had consistently ruled in favour of the same classification.

They pointed out that Indian manufacturers such as Saint-Gobain and Goldplus classify identical goods under 7005 1090, which has also been accepted by the department. They also argued that classification must be based on Indian tariff law and test results, not on the HSN code mentioned in the country-of-origin certificate.

The revenue counsel countered that the importer had filed bills of entry under 7005 2990 as part of self-assessment, and a protest could not be made against one’s own declaration. He argued that if the importer intended another classification, they should have sought a first check or provisional assessment and then contested it. They relied on the country-of-origin certificate to support the denial of exemption.

The two-member bench comprising M. Ajit Kumar (Technical Member) and Ajayan T.V. (Judicial Member) observed that Article 265 of the Constitution requires that tax be collected strictly under authority of law, and excess duty cannot be demanded even if self-assessed.

The tribunal explained that self-assessment is also an appealable order and payment under protest can be made in such cases. The tribunal pointed out that test reports clearly showed the presence of a tin layer acting as an absorbent or non-reflective coating, which satisfied the requirements of Chapter Note 2(c) to Chapter 70.

It further observed that classification cannot be denied merely because the country-of-origin certificate used a different code, as classification must be determined under Indian tariff law.

The tribunal explained that clear float glass with a tin absorbent layer fits tariff heading 7005 1090 and that the importer is entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 46/2011. The appeals were allowed and the orders of the Commissioner (Appeals) were set aside

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates