Case Law Details
Chemplast Sanmar Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Chennai)
The appellant had contended before the authorities below that as per Section 83 (3) of Chapter VII , Section 83 (5) of Chapter VII of the Finance Act, 2010, Section 94 of the Finance Act, 2004, Section 138 & Section 139 of the Finance Act, 2007 read with Notification No.28/2010- CE and No.29/2011-CE both dated 22.06.2010, imported coal would not attract Customs Education Cess and Higher Education Cess; that the adjudicating had erred by including the clean energy cess component with Basic Customs Duty for the purpose of calculation of Customs Educational Cess and Higher Education Cess.
CESTAT held that The Clean Energy Cess is levied as duty of excise and is applicable to imported goods by virtue of Section 3(1) of Customs Tariff Act, 1975 in the form of additional duty of Customs and as such it is clear Clean Energy Cess on imported goods is levied as additional duty of Customs under Section 3 (1) of Customs Tariff Act, 1975 and therefore becomes duty of Customs.
CESTAT further held that, it is amply clear that Education Cess levied under Section 81(1) of Finance Act, 2004 on imported goods specified in First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 into India at the rate of 2% on aggregate duty of Customs levied under Section 12 of Customs Act, 1962 as per Section 84 (1) read with Section 84 (2) of Finance Act, 2004 will also levied on Clean Energy Cess as being part of aggregate of Customs
FULL TEXT OF THE CESTAT CHENNAI ORDER
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
