Page 12 - ELT_15th May 2020_VOL 372_Part 4th

x EXCISE LAW TIMES [ Vol. 372
Assessment - Reassessment - Request for reassessment of bill of entry not
required when duty paid under protest at the time of its filing - Marking
of protest on bill of entry is an information to Department that duty not
paid voluntarily and it required to vacate such protest by passing a
speaking re-assessment order - Section 17 of Customs Act, 1962 —
Commissioner of Customs, Tuticorin v. Sakthi Sugars Ltd. (Tri. - Chennai) ........... 577
ATF (Aviation Turbine Fuel) leftover in incoming Aircraft, freight element
not includible for its assessment - See under VALUATION (CUSTOMS) ... 596
Bill of Entry for import of shipping vessel filed belatedly, rate of duty and
tariff valuation thereof - See under VALUATION (CUSTOMS) ......... 559
BRC submitted belatedly in DBK claim, penalty imposable - See under
PENALTY ...................................... 551
Burden of proof of licit acquisition of Gold having been discharged by
accused, confiscation not sustainable - See under SMUGGLING ........ 606
Car matting, classification of - See under CARPETS ................. 465
Carpets - Car matting - Classification of - Stipulation in Chapter Note to 57
of Central Excise Tariff that carpets and other floor coverings in which
textile materials serve as exposed surface of Article when in use - This
feature of car mats not rejected by Revenue Authorities - Finding of
Tribunal that though in common parlance impugned product may not be
considered as carpets, in view of Chapter, Section Notes, Chapter Note 1
to Chapter 57 ibid, and interpretative notes for Rule 3(a) of Rule of
Interpretation in HSN, impugned goods classifiable under Tariff Item
5703 90 90 ibid - No error in such reasoning - Chapter 87 ibid does not
contain car mats as independent Tariff Entry -All mechanical components
covered under Chapter 87 - HSN Explanatory Notes dealing with
interpretation of rules specifically exclude “tufted textile carpets,
identifiable for use in motor cars” from Heading 8708 ibid and placed
them under Heading 5703 ibid - Third condition specified in Section XVII
ibid of Explanatory Notes in relation to “III-Parts and Accessories” not
satisfied by subject item - Just for sole reason that subject item are
exclusively made for cars and not for “home use” (in broad terms), goods
cannot be transplanted to residual entry against Heading 8708 ibid -
Subject-goods come under Tariff Item 5703 90 90 ibid - No necessity to
import “common parlance” test or any other similar device of
construction for identifying position of these goods against relevant tariff
entries - Order of Tribunal affirmed — Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi-III v.
UNI Products India Ltd. (S.C.) .............................. 465
CENTRAL EXCISE ACT, 1944 :
— Section 2(f) - See under PHARMACEUTICALS FOR REPACKING ....... 622
— Section 5A - See under AREA BASED EXEMPTION ............... 495
— Section 14 - See under EVIDENCE ......................... 538
— Section 35C - See under APPELLATE TRIBUNAL’S ORDER .......... 553
— Section 35G - See under APPEAL TO HIGH COURT .............. 553
CENTRAL EXCISE NOTIFICATIONS :
— Notification No. 102(E) - See under REFUND/REFUND CLAIM ........ 577
— Notification No. 39/2001-C.E. - See under AREA BASED EXEMPTION .... 495
EXCISE LAW TIMES  15th May 2020  12