Denying The Customs Duty Exemption Despite The Valid Country Of Origin Certificate Is Not Sustainable: CESTAT
The Delhi Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that denying the benefit of customs duty exemption despite the valid country of origin certificate is not sustainable.The bench of Rachna Gupta (Judicial Member) has noted that it will hinder the free flow of trade between agreeing nations if the exemption requested under the applicable rules is denied...
The Delhi Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that denying the benefit of customs duty exemption despite the valid country of origin certificate is not sustainable.
The bench of Rachna Gupta (Judicial Member) has noted that it will hinder the free flow of trade between agreeing nations if the exemption requested under the applicable rules is denied on one or the other pretext, especially if it is based only on assumptions and presumptions.
The appellant/assessee is an importer who filed a Bill of Entry for clearance of goods declared as 22 K assorted jewellery (481 pieces). The Bill of entry was filed by the appellant Customs Broker M/s. Jeena & Company.
The department formed an opinion that the appellant had given incomplete information about the origin of the gold from which the 481 pieces of assorted jewellery had been crafted. The goods were opined to not be eligible for the benefit of notification No. 46/2011 Cus dated 01.06.2011. The department ordered the re-assessment of the bill of entry, denying the benefit of the notification dated January 1, 2011.
The appellant contended that the goods described in the impugned Bill of Entry are in the form of 22 K gold jewellery, which was purchased by the appellants from Indonesia. The provisional office in Surabaya, Indonesia has issued the Country of Origin Certificate as is required in terms of Rule 13 of Notification No. 046/2011 dated 01.06.2011. The certificate was wrongly doubted.
The department contended that the mere presentation of a Certificate of Country of Origin or the fact that goods were direct consignment was not enough to claim the benefit of the notification. Since the Assessing Officer was not satisfied with respect to the authenticity of the Certificate of Country of Origin, he issued a questionnaire to the appellant.
The tribunal stated that no inquiry as mandated by the notification was conducted with respect to the country of origin certificate, which otherwise reveals that a certificate has been issued by the Competent Authority of one of the ASEAN countries. It was highly unacceptable that the certificate should not have been accepted.
The CESTAT ruled that the substantial benefit of duty exemption should not be denied solely on the basis of a procedural lapse.
Case Title: M J Gold Pvt. Ltd. Versus Principal Commissioner Of Customs (Import)
Citation: Final Order No. 50954 /2022
Date: 03-10-2022
Counsel For Appellant: Advocate Reena Rawat
Counsel For Respondent: Authorised Representative Gopi Raman