BEML Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Chennai)
CESTAT Chennai held that affixation of MRP on packages of imported goods containing quantity of more than 25 Kgs is not mandatory. Hence, differential duty demand for non-affixation of MRP cannot be sustained.
Facts- This appeal is filed by the Appellant-Importer against the Order-in-Original dated 27.02.2015 whereby the Commissioner of Customs, Chennai-III has demanded the differential duty on the spares/components imported by the Importer-Appellant since these were in the nature of pre-packaged commodity and there was no MRP/RSP label as these parts/components were meant for after sales or replacement.
Conclusion- Held that Rule 2A(3) of the PC Rules provides for an exception from affixation of MRP in respect of packages & commodities containing quantity of more than 25 kgs. In this case there is no denial that all the packages imported were of more than 25 kgs. The demand on account of non-affixation of MRP has been raised on packages of imported goods containing quantity of more than 25 Kgs is therefore not sustainable. Thus, we find that the demand of duty confirmed in the impugned order by invoking the extended period of limitation cannot sustain as it is clear a case of interpretation.
