Value for purpose of CVD available in Bill of Entries: CESTAT dismisses Plea for Extended Period of Limitation [Read Order]

The Ahmedabad Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal ( CESTAT ) dismissed the plea for extended period of limitation as the value for purpose of Countervailing Duty ( CVD ) available in bill of entries.

The appeal has been filed by the Karnavati Car Air Conditioners Pvt. Ltd against change of classification of goods imported by the appellant.

The Counsel for the appellant pointed out that their imported goods and sought classification under heading 8708 and filed bill of entry No. 6422284 dated 19.08.2016. The RMS system raised a query seeking the MRP of the goods as that was considered mandatory under the provisions of section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 for the purpose of levy of CVD.

The counsel submitted that that for penalty Section 114( AA ) of the Customs Act has been invoked and that the said section applies only when a person “knowingly or intentionally” makes a false declaration. The learned Counsel argued that mere non-mention of MRP based assessment for the purpose of CVD cannot be called mis-declaration within the meaning of said section.

 A Two-Member Bench comprising Ramesh Nair, Judicial Member and Raju, Technical Member observed that “We find that extended period of limitation has been involved to raise this demand. The show cause notice has been issued on 13.04.2018 whereas, the bill of entries is dated 26.07.2016 to 13.08.2016. It is seen that all the data required for the notice except the MRP was available in the bill of entry filed by the appellant. In these circumstances, we do not find any reason to hold that anything was suppressed by the appellant for the purpose of evasion.”

“The description of the goods the heading in which classification has been claimed and the rate of duty for the purpose of CVD and the value for the purpose of CVD are all available on the bill of entries. In these circumstances, we do not find that revenue has been able to establish the case for revocation of extended period of limitation. In view of above, we hold that the extended period of limitation could not have been involved in the instance case” the Tribunal noted.

To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE

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