Case Law Details
In re Neha Traders (CAAR Mumbai)
In this article, we delve into the detailed order issued by the Customs Authority of Advance Ruling (CAAR) in Mumbai regarding the classification of Clear Float Glass with an absorbent-non-reflective layer of Tin on one side. The applicant, M/s. Neha Traders, sought an advance ruling on the classification of this glass product and its eligibility for exemption under Notification No. 46/2011-Customs dated 01.06.2011.
Applicant’s Background: M/s. Neha Traders, specializing in trading processed glass for various applications, intends to import Clear Float Glass from Malaysia with a Tin layer on one side for sale in India.
Characteristics of Clear Float Glass: Clear Float Glass is distortion-free, precision flat, transparent, and made of molten glass with a smooth and flat surface. It exhibits excellent optical transmission over a broad spectral range.
Manufacturing Process: The glass undergoes the “Pilkington process,” which includes steps like melting, refining, float bath, coating, annealing, inspection, and cutting to produce clear float glass.
Tin Coating: Tin is used for its high specific gravity and cohesiveness in the float glass process. It remains in a liquid state at 600°C. To distinguish the tin side from the air side, methods like the water droplet method, UV Light Method, and Tin-Side Digital Detector are used.
Classification Under CTH 7005: The applicant argued that the clear float glass should be classified under CTI 7005 1090 based on its nature, characteristics, and properties, as it fulfills the requirements under Note 2(c) to Chapter 70.
AIFTA Benefits: The applicant claimed eligibility for benefits under Notification No. 46/2011-Customs for imports from Malaysia based on the classification under CTI 7005 1090 and fulfillment of the ASEAN COO Rules.
Precedent Rulings: The applicant cited previous rulings by CAAR, Mumbai, which classified similar clear float glass products under sub-heading 7005 10 90.
Advance Ruling Questions: The applicant sought advance rulings on:
- Classification under CTI 7005 10 90
- Appropriate classification if not under 7005 10 90
- Eligibility for benefits under Notification No. 46/2011-Customs
Conclusion: Based on the analysis and comments from the jurisdictional authorities, the Customs Authority of Advance Ruling concluded that Clear Float Glass with a tin layer should be classified under CTI 7005 2990, not CTI 7005 1090 as claimed by the applicant. Consequently, the exemption under Notification No. 46/2011-Customs would not apply under the claimed sub-heading, but benefits under a different serial number in the notification may be available, subject to evidence of origin for each import.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF CUSTOMS AUTHORITY OF ADVANCE RULING, MUMBAI
M/s. Neha Traders (having IEC No. AAYPV2187P and hereinafter referred to as ‘the applicant’, in short) filed four applications (CAAR-1) for advance ruling before the Customs Authority for Advance Rulings, Mumbai (CAAR in short). The said applications were received in the secretariat of the CAAR, Mumbai on 10.04.2023 along with their enclosures in terms of Section 28H (1) of the Customs Act, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’ also). The applicant is seeking advance ruling on the classification of ‘Clear Float Glass with an absorbent – non reflective layer of Tin on one side’ and eligibility to claim the benefit of exemption (preferential tariff treatment) under Notification No. 46/2011-Customs dated 01.06.2011.
2. The applicant submitted that they are specializing in trading of processed glass used for various applications like industrial facades, interiors, shower panels, exterior glazing, solar panels, furniture, pergolas, etc. and for the manufacture of the said glass products, the Applicant is intending to import the Clear Float Glass having an absorbent —non-reflective layer of Tin on one side of the glass (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Clear Float Glass’ also) from Malaysia and sell the final product to the distributors, retailers and customers in India. The Clear Float Glass is distortion-free, precision flat and transparent glass. It is made of molten glass which flows through tweel to the molten tin bath and then to lehr. While floating through the molten tin, the glass under the works of gravity and surface tension becomes smooth and flat on both sides. Due to special processing technology and high-purity raw materials, flat glass has flatness, a smooth surface, no water ripples and impurities. Clear float glass exhibits excellent optical transmission, with the transmittance being around 90% over a broad spectral range from Ultraviolet (250 nm) all the way up to Infrared (2700 nm).’ The process undertaken to manufacture the clear float glass which would be imported by the Applicant is called the ‘Pilkington process’.
Further, the Applicant explained the standard steps viz. melting & refining, float bath, coating, annealing, inspection and cutting undertaken in the Pilkington process to manufacture clear float glass.
3. The applicant stated about the Tin coating on clear float glass that Tin is suitable for the float glass process because it has a high specific gravity, is cohesive, and is immiscible with molten glass. Tin is the only metal that remains in a liquid state at 600°C. Although lead and other various low-melting-point alloys were used in the past, the usage of tin in a float bath gives the sheet uniform thickness and very flat surfaces. It is important to distinguish the air side from the tin side for various reasons, primarily due to the tin side becoming ‘smoked’ when exposed to the acid present in window cleaners. The tin coating left on the clear float glass cannot be seen by the naked eye. In order to distinguish the tin surface from the air surface, the water droplet method, the UV Light Method and Tin-Side Digital Detector can be used.
4. In respect of the Classification of Clear Float Glass, the FISN Explanatory Notes to CTH 7005 provided at Page XIII-7005-1 states that “This heading covers float glass in sheets. Its raw materials are melted in a furnace. The molten glass leaves the furnace and is fed on to a float bath of molten metal. On the float bath, the glass acquires the flatness of a liquid pool and later retains the smooth finish of liquid surfaces. Before it reaches the end of the bath, it is cooled to a temperature at which it is hard enough to be passed over rollers without being marked or distorted. From the float bath the glass moves through an annealing lehr, at the end of which it is cooled and can be cut. This glass is not surface ground or polished: it is perfectly flat as a result of the’ manufacturing process.”
Note 2(c) to Chapter 70 reads as follows:
“2. For the purposes of headings 70:03, 70.04 and 70.05 :
(a) glass is not regarded as “worked” by reason of any process it has undergone before annealing;
(b) cutting to shape does not affect the classification of glass in sheets;
(c) the expression “absorbent, reflecting or non-reflecting layer” means a microscopically thin coating of metal or of a chemical compound (for example, metal oxide) which absorbs, for example, infra-red light or improves the reflecting qualities of the glass while still allowing it to retain a degree of transparency or translucency; or which prevents light from being reflected on the surface of the glass.
Further, the applicant, citing above mentioned HSN Explanatory Notes to CTH 7005, Note 2(c) to Chapter 70 and the relevant tariff entries under CTH 7005 of the First Schedule to the Custom Tariff Act read with Rule 1 of General Rule of Interpretation has submitted that Note 2(c) only states that the metal coating or chemical coating on glass can be said to be absorbent if it absorbs, for example, infrared light. It nowhere prescribes the process through which the said coating/absorbent is to be applied to the glass. The FISN Explanatory Notes to CTH 7005 also do not prescribe any specified manner in which the coating of metal/absorbent is to be obtained. Therefore, the clear float glass can be said to be absorbent as long it has a coating of tin metal, irrespective of whether such coating is applied during the manufacturing process or subsequently. On a combined reading of the manufacturing process and product literature it can be concluded that the layer of tin which is absorbent in nature is applied/coated on the said product under the manufacturing process. Therefore, the Clear Float Glass fulfils the requirement under Note 2(c) to Chapter 70. As the tin coated on the Clear float glass during the production process is an ‘absorbent’, the said Clear Float Glass would fulfil the requirements under Note 2(c) to Chapter 70 and thus, the same is appropriately classifiable under CTI 700510 90.
5. In respect of the AIFTA benefits for the import of Clear Float Glass from Malaysia, the Notification No. 46/2011-Cus. dated 01.06.2011, provides exemption to specified goods listed in the table thereto, from so much of the Customs duty leviable thereon as is in excess of the amount calculated at the rate specified in Column (4) of the said table, when it is originating from the ASEAN Countries specified there under and fulfils the origin criteria prescribed under the ASEAN COO Rules, which have been notified by the Central Government as the Customs Tariff [Determination of Origin of Goods under the Preferential Trade Agreement between the Governments of Member States of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and the Republic of India] Rules, 2009 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the ASEAN COO Rules’) vide Notification No. 189/2009-Cus (N.T.) dated 31.12.2009 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Notification No. 189/2009-Cus., NT.). Sr. No. 934 of said Notification No. 46/2011-Cus dated 01.06.2011, provides exemption from BCD to all goods covered under CTH from 70010020 to 70051090 when it is originating inter alia from Malaysia.
Further, the applicant, citing above mentioned notifications and rules has submitted that as the Clear Float Glass to be imported by the Applicant by its nature, characteristics and properties is classifiable under CTI 7005 10 90 and would fulfil the conditions of ASEAN COO Rules, the same should be eligible for the benefit of exemption under the AIFTA Notification irrespective of the HS code to be mentioned by the Foreign supplier in their export documents and COO.
6. The applicant has placed reliance on the following rulings pertaining to ‘clear float glass’ with an absorbent layer which illuminates under UV light: i. M/s. Chandrakala Associates, CAAR/Mum/ARC/36/2021 dated 24.09.2021, and ii. M/s. Suraj Constructions, CAAR/Muni/ARC/10/2022 dated 10.05.2022 and further, has submitted that in both the rulings mentioned above, the Customs Authority for Advance Rulings held that “Heading 7005 10 covers non-wired glass having an absorbent, reflecting or non-reflecting layer and the Headings 7005 21 to 7005 29 deal with non-wired glasses which are body tinted, opacified, flashed etc. Therefore, the subject goods should more appropriately be covered under sub-heading 7005 10 90.” It is to be noted that the ‘clear float glass’ which is the subject matter of the aforementioned Rulings is essentially the same product which the Applicant proposes to import. The Customs Authority for Advance Rulings in the matter of M/s. Suraj Constructions (supra) has ruled that if the Clear Float Glass is classifiable under CTI 7005 1090 based on its nature, characteristics & properties, then it would remain eligible for the benefit of exemption, irrespective of the IIS code mentioned in the COOs by the foreign supplier. The relevant portion of the Ruling reads as follows: “If the classification of the subject goods under sub-heading 7005 1090 is correct, as suggested by the applicant and concurred by the Jurisdictional Commissioner of Customs, it would be a travesty of justice to deny the benefit of an exemption available to that subheading. I have also taken note of the fact that in case of M/s. Kibing group, the Royal Malaysian Customs authorities appear to have accepted the HS code 7005 1090 for the subject goods. If that is the case, I see no reason why M/s. Xinyi should be placed on a different footing… Whereas the Principal Commissioner of Customs (Air Cargo), Chennai-VII has adopted a logical, reasonable and legal stand that if the test report confirms the applicant’s claim, then benefit of the exemption would be extended. Therefore, I hold that if the subject goods are classifiable under the sub-heading 7005 1090 based on their nature, characteristics & properties, then they would remain eligible for the aforementioned exemption irrespective of the HS code mentioned in the COOs.”
7. In light of the aforementioned submissions, the Applicant has sought the Advance Ruling as under:
Question 1: Whether the said Clear Float Glass having an absorbent – non reflective layer of tin on one side of the glass, which is proposed to be imported by the Applicant is classifiable under the Custom Tariff Item (‘CT1’) 7005 10 90?
Question 2: If the answer to the above question is in the negative, then what is the appropriate classification of said Clear Float Glass under Schedule 1 to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as “the Tarff Act”)?
Question 3: Whether the said Clear Float Glass which is proposed to be imported by the Applicant would be eligible for the benefit of Notification No. 46/2011- Customs, irrespective of the classification to be declared by the foreign supplier in the export documents and Certificate of Origin (‘COO’), as long as it merits classification under the Indian Customs Tariff Heading 70051090 and fulfils the origin criteria prescribed under the ASEAN COO Rules?
8. The applicant, in their application, have indicated their preference for importing the subject goods through the ports under the following jurisdictional authorities: – 1. The Commissioner of Customs, (Customs Bengaluru), .2. The Commissioner of Customs, Chennai-II (Import Commissionerate), 3. The Commissioner of Customs, Cochin Custom House, 4. The Commissioner of Customs (Nhava Sheva -III), Jawaharlal Nehru Customs House, Accordingly, copy of the application was sent to the above jurisdictional authorities, seeking comments on the application for advance rulings. However, CAAR, Mumbai has received comments only from the Commissioner of Customs, Cochin Custom House on 12.06.2023 and the Commissioner of Customs (Nhava Sheva -III), Jawaharlal Nehru Customs House on 24.05.2023 which are discussed here-in-after.
8.1 It is inter alia stated in the comments received from the Jurisdiction, Cochin Custom House that the float glass has not undergone any coating process (coating as absorbent, reflecting or non-reflecting layer) and cannot be classified under the Tariff Sub Heading 7005 10. The occurrence of tin layer on one side of the float glass does not make the glass have an absorbent, reflecting or non-reflecting layer. Further, as it is also not coloured throughout the mass (body tinted), opacified, flashed or merely surface ground, the item would not be covered under the Sub heading 7005 21. Hence, the appropriate classification for “clear float glass” would be under the tariff sub heading 7005 29 as “Others”. At the 8 digit level, if the item is `tinted’, it would be classifiable under the CTI 7005 2910 and if the item is ‘non-tinted’ it would be classifiable under CTI 7005 2990 of the Custom Tariff and attracts BCD at the rate of 10%. The Custom Tariff sub-heading 7005 29 attracts BCD at the rate of 5% while claiming the benefit of exemption Notification No. 46/2011-custom dated 01.06.2011 under Sl. No. 935(I) for the imports from ASEAN countries. Further, in Para A8 of statement of facts submitted by the applicant along with their application it is mentioned that tin is suitable for float glass process since tin in a float bath gives the sheet uniform thickness and very flat surface. From the submission the applicant it is clear that tin is not used in float glass process with the specific objective of providing any absorbent, reflecting or non-reflecting layers. The irradiation of the glass with UV rays is resorted to find which of the surface displays Cathodoluminescence so as to able to distinguish the Tin side from the air. From the submissions made by the applicant and citations, it appears that the presence of tin is by default and on account of manufacturing process and not by design or intended to add a layer with any of the properties such as absorption or reflection or non-reflection. If clear float glass is not subjected to coating with a metal or of a chemical compound in accordance with the requirement of the specific industry to which such glass is proposed to be utilised, the same is classifiable under CTI-I 7005 2990.
8.2 It is inter alia stated in the comments received from the Jurisdiction, Jawaharlal Nehru Customs House that Chapter Note 2(c), makes specifically clear that as per explanatory notes in Harmonised Commodity Description and Coding system, in chapter 7005 what is intended to be classified under the heading 7005 10 is float glass coated with an absorbent, reflecting or reflecting layer. As per Chapter 70 note 2(c), the Absorbent, reflecting or non-reflecting layer has been defined as a microscopically thin coating, which has to be applied on the float line at high temperature during the manufacturing process itself to the glass before the process of Annealing, so as to not regard the glass as worked upon, in respect of Chapter 70 note 2(a). Absorbent, reflecting or non-reflecting coating is usually applied on the float line at high temperature during the manufacturing process to the air side of the glass using Chemical Vapour Deposition (CVD) process or soft coating which involves a coating of reflecting layer through splutter coating after the float glass manufacturing process. As evident from the information available on various online platforms, related to the manufacturing process of Float glass, Chemical Vapour Deposition (CVD) is an online pyrolytic coating technology integrated directly into the float glass manufacturing process. Depending on the desired end product one or several coatings can be applied. Coatings can be applied inside the tin bath or at the Lehr entry or both.
Further, Chapter Note 2(c) makes specifically clear that the float glass shall be regarded as that having an absorbent layer, when it is coated with a microscopically thin coating of metal or of a chemical compound. Hence, it is a fact that any float glass said to have an absorbent layer will invariably be coated with a microscopically thin coating of metal or metal oxide, provided the coating is done on-line i.e. during the process of manufacturing of float glass, and before the process of annealing, so that the glass isn’t regarded as worked. If otherwise, the float glass has to be regarded as one having no absorbent layer. If only one side of the glass is having a layer of tin, this can be attributed to the thermal diffusion of tin on one side during the manufacturing process and confirms the fact that the glass was not subjected to coating with an absorbent reflecting or non-reflecting layer during the manufacturing process of clear final glass. Transparent float glass is not coated (falls under the ambit of BIS IS Standard 14900:2018, which excludes coated glass), yet the said transparent float glass possesses a tin-layer. Presence of Tin side (float side) and Air side is a basic property of any float glass manufactured. Hence, the mere presence of a tin side (tin layer) cannot be regarded as a coating. This fact regarding the presence of Tin side and Air side, is also evident from the submissions of the applicant.
As evident from the declarations and submissions presented in support of their claim, the goods appear to be without the requisite absorbent layer as discussed in the foregoing paras. There is only a layer of tin that attributes to the existence of Tin side of the float glass. The Clear float glass, has parallel sides, one side of which is known as the tin side and the other side as the air side. All glass manufactured under the float process (clear, coated or tinted) invariably would contain a layer of tin on one side, which does not mean that the float glass is to be classified under 7005 10. The float glass being imported ought to be subjected to testing, to ascertain certain parameters.
9. From the above, it is clear that both the jurisdictional Commissioners of Customs are of the view that the goods in question i.e. “Clear Float Glass” with a layer of tin on one side is classifiable under Customs Tariff Item 7005 2990 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 and attracts BCD at the rate of 10%. Accordingly, the benefit of exemption from duty under notification no. 46/2011– Customs dated 01.06.2011 Serial No. 934 which provides exemption to goods classifiable under 70010020 to 70051090 cannot be extended to the subject goods. The Customs Tariff Sub-Heading 7005 29 attracts BCD at the rate of 5% when imported from ASEAN Countries by availing the benefit of exemption Notification No. 46/2011-Customs dated 01.06.2011 under Si. No. 935(1).
10. Personal hearing in the matter was held on 14.09.2023 through virtual mode wherein the authorized representatives of the applicant while explaining the goods in question referred to earlier ruling issued by CAAR, Mumbai in support of classification claimed by them. They also referred to Note 2(c) to Chapter 70 and mentioned that all conditions of said note have been satisfied by the goods in question which they intend to import. They also mentioned that they have not imported the goods in question in the past. They reiterated the submissions made in the application for advance ruling. Shri Ankush Salame, DC, Group-III, NS-III, JNCH explained their earlier submission which was received in office of the CAAR, Mumbai on 24.05.2023 and AC, Group-III, Chennai-II (Import Commissionerate) submitted that they concur with the views of the Jurisdiction JNCH in the matter.
11. The applicant further submitted their rejoinder through E-Mail on 18.09.2023 in office of the CAAR, Mumbai in respect of the comments made by Shri Ankush Salame and AC, Group-III, Chennai-II (Import Commissionerate). Vide said rejoinder the applicant submitted that they are proposing to import the above goods from various suppliers in Malaysia. The only objection given by the Customs department is that this layer is incidental to the manufacturing process of float glass and is not done specifically for an intended purpose / use. This objection is completely incorrect as Note 2(c) nowhere creates distinction between coating done online (as part of manufacturing process) or offline (as a part of separate process). What is required is an absorbent layer which is undisputedly present on bottom side of the float glass. the reference made to IS Standard 14900:2000 is totally out of context. This standard nowhere defines what is transparent float glass, what is coating, etc. We understand that the product under consideration in the above IS standard is a totally different product which does not have a layer of tin. In other words, IS standard refers to a product different than what was being imported by the two entities for whom rulings have already been passed and the one proposed to be imported by the Applicants. Further, the IS standard also nowhere gives the process of manufacture of float glass and the intent to be covered under the said standard. Hence, no context can be brought for the purpose of deciding the classification under Customs Tariff. In any case, presence of statutory definition of an absorbent layer in the Customs Tariff will rule out reference to any external meaning or understanding of the same.
12. Notification no. 46/2011-Cus. dated 01.06.2011 prescribes the effective rate of duty for specified goods imported from Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam, Myanmar, Indonesia, Brunei Darussalarn, Laos, Philippines and Cambodia (ASEAN). The said Notification makes provision to exempt goods of the description as specified in column (3) of the table appended thereto and falling under the chapter, heading, sub-heading or tariff item of the first schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (51 of 1975) as specified in the corresponding entry in column (2) of the appended table, from so much of the duty of customs leviable thereon as is in excess of the amount calculated at the rate specified, provided the importer proves to the satisfaction of the Deputy Commissioner of Customs or Assistant Commissioner of Customs, as the case may be, that the goods in respect of which the benefit of the said exemption is claimed are of the origin of the countries as mentioned in Appendix-I, in accordance with provisions of the Customs Tariff [Determination of Origin of Goods under the Preferential Trade Agreement between the Governments of Member States of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and the Republic of India] Rules, 2009, published in the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue), No. 189/2009-Customs (N.T.), dated the 31st December 2009.
13. CBIC issues notifications for implementing tariff concessions and rules of origin, under section 25 of the Customs Act, 1962 and section 5 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 respectively, in order to incorporate the commitments undertaken in domestic legislation. Under a trade agreement, duty concessions are required to be extended only to such imported goods which are ‘made in’ the exporting country. Each FTA contains a set of rules of origin, which prescribe the criteria that must be fulfilled for goods to attain ‘originating status’ in the exporting country. Such criteria are generally based on factors such as domestic value addition and substantial transformation in the course of manufacture/processing. The goods imported under a trade agreement are required to be accompanied by a ‘Certificate Of Origin’ (COO) issued by the designated authority of the exporting country. The COO contains details of goods covered and originating criteria.
Chapter VAA and section 28DA were inserted in the Customs Act, 1962, vide clause 110 of Finance Act, 2020. The new section, inter-alia, provides for a basic level of due diligence on the part of an importer to satisfy himself that the claimed originating criteria have been met, and that, mere submission of a certificate of origin may not be sufficient. For this purpose, the importer is required to possess sufficient origin related information. As required in the aforesaid section 28DA, Central Government has also notified the Customs (Administration of Rules of Origin under Trade Agreements) Rules, 2020 (CAROTAR, 2020) vide notification no. 81/2020-Customs (N.T.), dated 21st August, 2020, to be implemented from 21st September, 2020.
14. I have considered all the materials placed before me for the subject goods. I have gone through the submissions made by the applicant during personal hearing and the comments of the jurisdictional Principal Conunissioner/Commissioner of Customs, on the impugned subject matter. The subject goods for which advance ruling has been sought, their characteristics, manufacturing process, utility etc. are already mentioned in the aforementioned paras. The subject goods are clear float glass. I concur with the comments received from the Jurisdiction JNCH, wherein, it is submitted, and rightly so, that as per Chapter 70 note 2(c), the Absorbent, reflecting or non-reflecting layer has been defined as a microscopically thin coating, which has to be applied on the float line at high temperature during the manufacturing process itself to the glass before the process of Annealing, so as to not regard the glass as worked upon, in respect of Chapter 70 note 2(a). Chapter Note 2(c), makes specifically clear that the float glass shall be regarded as that having an absorbent layer, when it is coated with a microscopically thin coating of metal or of a chemical compound. Further, Chapter Note 2(a) read with chapter heading for 7005, make it specifically clear that the float glass should not be worked upon, i.e. the process of coating has to be done before the process of annealing. Hence, it is invariably made evident, that the clear float glass can only have an absorbent layer, if it has undergone the coating process by virtue of CVD-Chemical Vapour Deposition. The comments of Jurisdiction INCH is noteworthy that the clear float glass, has parallel sides, one side of which is known as the tin side and the other side as the air side. All glass manufactured under the float process (clear, coated or tinted) invariably would contain a layer of tin on one side, which does not mean that the float glass is to be classified under 7005 10. I am of the view that any float glass said to have an absorbent layer will invariably be coated with a microscopically thin coating of metal or metal oxide, provided the coating is done on-line i.e. during the process of manufacturing of float glass, and before the process of annealing, so that the glass isn’t regarded as worked. If otherwise, the float glass has to be regarded as one having no absorbent layer.
15. I also agree with the submissions and explanation of the relevant HS code presented by Jurisdiction Cochin. The float glass has not been undergone any coating process (coating as absorbent, reflecting or non-reflecting layer) and cannot be classified under the Tariff Sub Heading 7005 10. The occurrence of tin layer on one side of the float glass does not make the glass have an absorbent, reflecting or non-reflecting layer. Further, as it is also not coloured throughout the mass (body tinted), opacified, flashed or merely surface ground, the item would not be covered under the Sub heading 7005 21. Hence, the appropriate classification for “clear float glass” would be under the tariff sub heading 7005 29 as “Others”. At the 8 digit level, if the item is ‘tinted’, it would be classifiable under the CTI 7005 2910 and if the item is ‘non-tinted’ it would be classifiable under CTI 7005 2990 of the Custom Tariff Act, 1975.
16. Considering all the facts and submissions presented by the applicant and the Jurisdictional Pr. Commissioners/Commissioners of Customs and taking into account the relevant test reports I have reached a decision that the goods in question i.e. the clear float glass don’t merit classification under CTI 7005 1090 as claimed by the applicant, instead they merit classification under CTH 7005 and more specifically under CTI 7005 2990 of the first schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 and accordingly, the benefit of exemption from duty under notification no. 46/2011- Customs dated 01.06.2011 Serial No. 934 which provides exemption to goods classifiable under 70010020 to 70051090 cannot be extended to the subject goods. Although, based on the applicant’s submission about the country of origin and the manufacturer of the subject goods, benefits under sr. no. 935 (instead of sr. No. 934 as claimed by the applicant) of the table annexed to the exemption notification no. 46/2011-Cus., dated 01.06.2011, would be available, subject to the condition that in respect of each case of import, the applicant would have to produce evidence before the Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Customs as to the origin of subject goods.
17. I rule accordingly.
