The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Chennai bench has recently directed the customs department to reconsider the proceedings against Lenovo India.
The Company had placed two purchase orders for the purchase of Laptop computers/Notebooks manufactured by the Chinese manufacturing company viz. M/s. LCFC (HEFEI) Electronics Technology, China, which were shipped directly by the manufacturer to the appellant. The same arrived at the Chennai Air Cargo, upon which the appellant filed the impugned Bills-of-Entry where the goods were inadvertently described as “Cartons” in the Bill-of-Entry and the Tariff Item applicable to Cartons, namely, 4819 10 10 was applied and the applicable Basic Customs Duty (BCD) at 10% was paid as against “Nil” BCD payable for the correct classification of Laptops under Tariff Item 8471 30 10; and that due to inadvertence, the invoice raised by the Chinese factory entity (manufacturer) on the Hong Kong entity (supplier) was enclosed to the Bill-of-Entry instead of the actual invoice raised by the Hong Kong entity on the appellant. Accordingly, assessment under 149 of the Customs Act was initiated against the assessee.
Before the Tribunal, the appellant-Company all such necessary documents were available, but however, it is for the Proper Officer to verify the availability of the same at the relevant point of time. This job is therefore left to the Adjudicating Authority to ascertain and pass a speaking order.
While granting relief to the Company, Judicial Member P Dinesha observed that any amendment/re-assessment has to be in terms of Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962, and by the Proper Officer.
“Hence, it serves no purpose if the case is remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) since it is the Proper Officer who could call for any documents and then exercise his discretion to order amendment or reject, subject to the provisions of Section 149 ibid. Therefore, the matter is remanded to the file of the Adjudicating Authority/Proper Officer to verify the claim of the appellant strictly in terms of Section 149 ibid. and thereafter, pass an appropriate speaking order after giving reasonable opportunities to the appellant. All the contentions are left open,” the Tribunal said.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.
