Atherton Engineering Co. Private Limited Vs Commissioner of Customs (Calcutta High Court)
Calcutta High Court directed department to accept the classification adopted by appellant since de novo adjudication didn’t commenced within time permitted by High Court but commenced after seven years.
Facts- This appeal filed by the importer is directed against the order dated 26thJune, 2024, passed by the Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal), by which the appeal filed by the appellant herein challenging the de novo adjudication Order-in-Original dated 12.09.2017 was dismissed.
The appellant, during October, 1998 to February, 2001, imported several consignments of the product called `Artemia Cyst (Brine Shrimp eggs)’. The appellant described and declared this product as `prawn feed’ and on this basis goods were assessed provisionally by accepting a bank guarantee as security for the duty that may be finally assessed. If the goods were classified by the Customs as `prawn feed’, there was a duty exemption before 1999 budget and only 5% basic duty after that. According to the Customs authorities, it would fall under Chapter Heading 0511.99 and that the imported goods were prawn feed.
Conclusion- Since the Court directed an enquiry to be done whether the imported goods contained an `embryo’ or a live organism and the factual enquiry was required to be done upon notice to the appellant/writ petitioner and after giving them an opportunity to counter the evidence of the revenue and to produce its own evidence in support of its contention. Admittedly, the product was an imported `embryo’ or a live organism and though it is stated across the Bar that representative samples have been drawn by the Department, it cannot be disputed that those samples will not be in the same condition as on the date of import, that is, on August 19, 1998. Thus, as on date, the direction issued by the Single Bench is not feasible of compliance.
