Case Law Details
In re Indian Compressors Ltd. (CAAR Delhi)
On perusal of the revised Form AAR (CE-I), I find that the applicant contends that e-cycle merits classification under sub-heading 8712 00 10 of the Central Excise Tariff (sic). Noting the broad concordance between the erstwhile Central Excise tariff and the Customs tariff, I find that heading 8712 covers Bicycles and other cycles (including delivery tricycles), not motorized. Given that the good in question is admittedly e-cycle, albeit with power less than 250W, it does not prima facie meet the requirement of “not motorized” prescribed in the heading. The alternative heading 8711 covers Motorcycles (including mopeds) and cycles fitted with auxiliary motor, with or without side cars appears more appropriate, given that the e-cycle has a motor, albeit of power less than 250W. On careful reading of the application, enclosure regarding the e-cycle and deliberations during the personal hearing, I find that the application is more in the nature of a prayer for fiscal indulgence for an innovative and environment friendly mode of individual transport and not for a ruling on classification of the said mode of transport under the Customs Act, guided as it would be as per the laid down provisions of law and jurisprudence. The specific prayer for classification of e-cycle as a non-motorised cycle under heading 8712 and not 8711 is an effort to lend technical wherewithal to the said substantive prayer.
In view of the above, I find that the question posed for advance ruling, couched as it is for seeking classification of e-cycle, is essentially a prayer made for exemption from customs duty on import of such e-cycles from China, which is beyond the powers vested with this Authority. In addition, the application is not in conformity with the prescribed procedure. Further, the applicant has not been able to meet with the procedural requirements, even after being advised to do so and the modalities of doing so during the personal hearing.
In view of the foregoing, having followed the procedure laid down in section 28-1 (2) of the Customs, I conclude that the prayer made in the application is not essentially covered by section 28-H 2 (a) of the Customs Act, 1962 and beyond the scope of powers vested with this Authority. Further, the application, including the revised application, are not in conformity with the procedure laid down in CAAR Regulations, 2021.
FULL TEXT OF ORDER OF CUSTOMS AUTHORITY OF ADVANCE RULING, DELHI
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
