CESTAT Delhi allows classification of Light Green Float Glass with duty exemption

The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), New Delhi, upheld the classification of Light Green Float Glass imported by M/s Asahi India Glass Ltd. under CTI 7005 10 10, making it eligible for duty exemption. The tribunal dismissed the Customs Department’s appeal, ruling that CBIC circulars cannot override settled legal precedents.

Key Highlights of the Proceedings:

  1. Case Background:
  • The dispute concerned the classification of Light Green Float Glass imported by M/s Asahi India Glass Ltd.
  • The Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), Jaipur appealed against the Commissioner (Appeals), Jaipur’s order, which had upheld the classification under CTI 7005 10 10, granting customs duty exemption.
  • The Customs Department argued that the goods should be classified under CTI 7005 21 10, making them subject to duty.

2. Main Legal Issue:

  • Whether Light Green Float Glass with a tin layer on one side qualifies as non-wired glass with an absorbent layer (CTI 7005 10 10) or as body-tinted glass (CTI 7005 21 10).
  • This classification determined eligibility for exemption under Notification No. 46/2011-CUS dated 01.06.2011.

3. Arguments by the Customs Department:

  • The tin layer does not constitute an “absorbent layer” under Chapter Note 2(c) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975.
  • The CBIC Circular (14.11.2024) clarified that clear float glass with only a tin layer should be classified under CTI 7005 29 90, not CTI 7005 10 10.
  • Earlier imports of similar goods were classified differently, leading to inconsistency.

4. Arguments by Asahi India Glass Ltd.:

  • The Commissioner (Appeals) had previously ruled (20.07.2022) in their favor, and that decision was accepted by the department, setting a precedent.
  • Test reports from CSIR Kolkata confirmed the presence of an absorbent tin layer, justifying classification under CTI 7005 10 10.
  • Supreme Court rulings establish that in case of ambiguity in classification, the interpretation favoring the assessee should be adopted.

5. CESTAT’s Findings:

  • The tribunal rejected reliance on the CBIC Circular, ruling that circulars cannot override settled legal positions.
  • The presence of an absorbent tin layer met the criteria for CTI 7005 10 10, making the goods eligible for duty exemption.
  • The Customs Department had earlier accepted this classification, and it cannot now take a contradictory stance.
  • Past legal precedents and test reports supported Asahi India Glass’s classification claim.

6. Final Decision:

  • The Customs Department’s appeal was dismissed.
  • The tribunal upheld the classification under CTI 7005 10 10, confirming duty exemption for Asahi India Glass Ltd.
  • The ruling reinforced that circulars cannot override judicial decisions, and tax classification disputes should favor the assessee in case of ambiguity.

In case you face any issues related to Indirect Tax-Customs, GST, Foreign Trade Policy (FTP), Arbitration matters and Central Licensing and related advisory matters in India then please feel free to get in touch with SJ EXIM Services.

We offer Legal advice and litigation support in matters related to Indirect Tax-Customs, FTP, other Indirect Tax matters & Arbitration law, all sorts of Central licensing and related matters. Come and explore the new way of doing business with us!

1. The views expressed are based on the interpretation of the relevant information/documents, applicable law, and government policy and there is no assurance that a court or tribunal or regulatory body or other governmental authority may not interpret it differently.
2.  We are not responsible for updating or revising this article on account of any change in law or interpretation thereof or a change in events or circumstances informed or occurring after the date of this article unless specifically requested for it.
3. Our advice should not be taken or used out of context or reproduced for any other purpose or transaction. Views expressed in this update are strictly personal, based on our understanding of the underlying law.
4. We are not responsible for any injury, loss or cost arising to any person who refers to this update and acts or refrains from any act accordingly. We would suggest that detailed legal advice must be sought before relying on this update.

NOTE: All Inquiries/Consulting/Advisory/Assignments are solicited via email only & it is a PAID Service only!


Discover more from 𝐒 𝐉 π„π—πˆπŒ π’πžπ«π―π’πœπžπ¬

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Leave a Reply

Let’s connect

← Back

Thank you for your response. ✨

Discover more from 𝐒 𝐉 π„π—πˆπŒ π’πžπ«π―π’πœπžπ¬

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading

Discover more from 𝐒 𝐉 π„π—πˆπŒ π’πžπ«π―π’πœπžπ¬

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading