Final Order Nos. 181-183/99-C arising from in Appeal Nos. C/1804-1806/94-C. Case: Central Cables (P) Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Customs, Bombay. CEGAT (Customs, Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal) & CESTAT (Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal)

Case NumberFinal Order Nos. 181-183/99-C arising from in Appeal Nos. C/1804-1806/94-C
CounselFor Appellant: Shri V.S. Nankani, Advocate and For Respondents: Shri M.P. Singh, JDR.
JudgesShri S.S. Kang, Member (J) and V.K. Agrawal, Member (T)
IssueCustoms Tariff Act, 1975
Citation2001 (135) ELT 144 (Tri. - Del.)
Judgement DateMarch 03, 1999
CourtCEGAT (Customs, Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal) & CESTAT (Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal)


V.K. Agrawal, Member (T), (New Delhi)

  1. These are three appeals arising out of a common Adjudication order dated 30-11-1993 passed by the Collector of Customs involving the issue of classification of imported products T.S. 530 whether under Heading 40.02 of the Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act as claimed by the Appellants Company M/s. Central Cables P. Ltd. or under sub-heading 3901.99 as adjudged in the impugned order. All the three appeals are being disposed of by one common order.

  2. The facts, in brief, are that the appellants company manufacture cables for which they imported a product T.S.-530 which was classified by them under Heading 40.02 of Customs Tariff Act (CTA). Two show cause notices dated 22-5-1992 and 29-1-1993 for demanding duty, confiscation of goods and imposing penalty on the ground that the product was declared by them as Synthetic Rubber TS-530, deliberately suppressing the information that T.S. 530 was chemically known as Chlorosulphonated Polyethylene Elastomer which is classifiable under sub-heading 3901.99 of C.T.A. The Collector of Customs, Mumbai, under the impugned order, ordered the classification of goods under sub-heading 3901.99 of C.T.A., confirmed the demand of customs duty amounting to Rs. 12,24,244/- and imposed a penalty of Rs. 15,00,000/- on Appellate Company, Rs. 2,00,000/- on Shri G.D. Daga, Director and Rs. 1,00,000/- on Shri S.M. Lad, General Manager, holding that the impugned product was a modified polymer and by virtue of Note 5 to Chapter 39, it would merit classification under Heading 39.01.

  3. Shri V.S. Nankani, ld. Advocate, submitted that the issue regarding classification of the impugned product has been set at rest by the Appellate Tribunal in the case of Universal Cables Ltd. & Others v. C.C., Bombay vide Final order No. 517 to 534/96-C [1996 (16) RLT 340]; that in fact their matter was heard by the Collector along with the case against M/s. Universal Cables Ltd. (UCL) which is apparent from para 13 of the impugned order at page 56 of the Paper Book; that the main defence of the case of M/s. Universal Cables Ltd. was lead by Shri Hidayathullah, Senior Advocate and the same arguments were adopted by him (Shri Nankani) for defence of Central Cables Company. He, further, submitted that since 1984 the impugned goods were classified under Heading 40.02 of C.T.A. and they had imported the goods since May, 1987; that as such a practice was established by the Custom House for...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT