High Court of Delhi

United Sanitations Vs. Addl. Commissioner of Customs, ICD

MANU/DE/5251/2023

16.08.2023

Customs

There cannot be a static parameter for correct classification, due importance be given to the functional utility, design, shape and predominant usage

The Petitioner has instituted present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India through its Partner praying for quashing and setting aside of impugned order passed by the Additional Secretary to the Government of India exercising its revisional powers under Section 129DD of the Customs Act, 1962, thereby dismissing the revision application preferred by the Petitioner upholding the order of the original authority with regard to classification of goods exported and rejecting its claim of duty drawback under a different category.

There is no denial of the fact that the consignment of goods that was exported was containing sanitarywares albeit few parts made of brass elements but nonetheless not in any manner pertaining to use or application in "nuclear reactors, boilers, machineries and appliances". The respondent has clearly overlooked even the brochures pertaining to the items that amply demonstrates the essential features of the sanitary-wares and use of brass so as to make the articles more elegant and durable for the use of end consumers.

It is apparent that, the Respondent in a mindless manner has failed to even consider the common parlance and manner in which the articles are known, bought and sold in the marketing world. In A. Nagaraju Brothers v. State of Andhra Pradesh, it was reiterated that, no one single universal test can be applied for correct classification. There cannot be a static parameter for correct classification. It was held firstly that the (i) Harmonized System of Nomenclature ("HSN") along with the explanatory notes in the Excise Tariff provides a safe guide for interpretation of an Entry; secondly, the heading which provides a specific description shall be preferred to a heading having a more general description; and thirdly, due importance be given to the functional utility, design, shape and predominant usage while determining the classification of an item.

"Artwork" is ordinarily associated with the idea or feeling of painting, sculpture, photography etc., while "handicraft" implies an activity that needs skills with hands as well as artistic abilities. Ultimately, it is the end use of the product that is decisive and in the instant case, the items are meant for use in the kitchen, toilets or bathroom and although it may portray some art work in its designs, it is not 'artwork' or 'handicraft' item. Therefore, duty drawback could only be claimed in category of goods falling Chapter 74 vide item No. 741802.

The impugned order passed by the Revisionary Authority thereby approving the order-in-original cannot be sustained in lawis quashed. The respondent shall consider the claim for duty drawback of the 'subject goods' in terms of classification vide item No. 741802 as per tariff applicable for the year 2011-212. The petition is disposed of accordingly. Petition allowed.

Tags : Products Classification Duty drawback

Share :