Kalpataru Power Transmission Ltd Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Chennai)
CESTAT Chennai set aside the customs order on classification of Optical Power Ground Wire (OPGW) cables, holding that Customs failed to produce test reports or factual evidence before denying duty exemption. The Tribunal ruled that classification cannot be based on assumptions, catalogues, or product use, and emphasized that testing and technical verification are mandatory to determine whether fibres are individually sheathed. Citing the rule of best evidence, it held that Revenue bears the burden of proof to establish correct tariff classification, and allowed the importer’s appeal with consequential relief.
The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Chennai, has allowed the appeal filed by Kalpataru Power Transmission Ltd., setting aside the lower appellate order. The Tribunal ruled that the Revenue failed to discharge its burden of proof to demonstrate that the imported goods, Optical Power Ground Wire Fibre Cable (OPGW), were correctly reclassified by the Department.
The Classification Dispute
Kalpataru Power Transmission Ltd. imported OPGW and its accessories, initially classifying them under Customs Tariff Heading (CTH) 8544 (for the cable) and 853670 (for accessories), and claimed exemption under Notification No. 24/2005-Cus.
The Adjudicating Authority rejected this classification, reclassifying the OPGW under CTH 9001 and the accessories under CTH 7616. The lower authorities upheld the reclassification based on the argument that OPGW is a composite good, and its primary function—grounding and fault current conduction—was relevant for classification, thus placing it in CTH 9001, which covers optical fibre cables other than those of heading 8544.
