Hyundai Motors India Ltd Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Chennai)
CESTAT Chennai held that since department has not discharged the burden of proof showing that Electronic Control Unit (ECU) is classifiable under CTH 8708 9090 hence the classification declared by the assessee will prevail. Thus, benefit of notification no. 46/2011 allowed.
Facts- M/s. Hyundai Motor India Limited, Kanchipuram (HMIL), are engaged in the manufacture of passenger motor cars, under the brand name of “Hyundai”. They import various parts and accessories of passenger motor cars through Chennai ports.
Intelligence developed by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI), allegedly indicated that HMIL was resorting to misclassification of various goods imported for manufacture of automobiles, in order to avail undue benefit of BCD exemption vide Notification No. 152/2009-Customs dated 31/12/2009 as amended. They visited HMIL’s premises and made enquiries. Thereafter, HMIL vide their letter dated 10/02/2020 informed DRI that they have reviewed the classification adopted in respect of certain Bills of Entry (BE), details of which were also given, and had found that the classification assigned by them was not consistent in some of the cases with the nature of the products and as the Country of Origin (COO) Certificates with the inconsistent codes had already been filed, they intend approaching the suppliers to revise the HS codes and issue the COO for the respective Bills of Entry retroactively as provided under the India-Korea CEPA. Further, the importer also informed the voluntary payment of differential duty and interest, in respect of some products and attached a copy of TR-6 challan paid at Chennai Customs.
