Digital Still Image Video Cameras Imported By Sony Not Be Entitled To Basic Customs Duty Exemption: CESTAT

The Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that digital still image video cameras imported by Sony are not entitled to basic customs duty exemption.

The bench of Justice Dilip Gupta (President) and P.V. Subba Rao (Technical Member) has observed that what was to be examined was whether the demand confirmed for the normal period of limitation contemplated under section 28(1) of the Customs Act for the reason that ‘digital still image video cameras’ imported by the appellant would not be entitled to basic customs duty exemption under the notification dated 01.03.2005, as amended by the notification dated 17.03.2012 was justified or not.

The appellant, M/s. Sony India Private Ltd. has sought the quashing of the order passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), by which the appeal has been dismissed and the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Customs holding the ‘digital still image video cameras’ imported by the appellant would not be entitled to basic customs duty exemption under the notification dated 01.03.2005, as amended by the notification dated 17.03.2012 has been upheld.

The issue raised was whether the ‘digital still image video cameras’ imported by the appellant would be entitled to BCD exemption under the notification dated 01.03.2005, as amended by the notification dated 17.03.2012, whereby an ‘Explanation’ was added.

The tribunal while allowing the appeal, held that the ‘digital still image video cameras’ imported by the appellant would not be entitled to basic customs duty exemption under the notification dated 01.03.2005, as amended by the notification dated 17.03.2012 on the basis of the decision rendered by the Tribunal would, therefore, have to be set aside and is set aside. 

Case Details

Case Title:  M/s Sony India Private Ltd Versus Commissioner of Customs (Appeals)

Case No.: CUSTOMS APPEAL NO. 51699 OF 2018

Date: 15.04.2025

Counsel For Appellant: B L Narasimhan, Shri Ashwani Bhatia and Ms. Anjali Gupta

Counsel For Respondent: Ajay Jain

Read More: GSTAT Infra: BSNL Leases 8th and 9th floor BSNL Bhavan To GSTAT on “As Is Where Is” Basis [READ LETTER]

Mariya Paliwala
Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You May Also Like

Chhattisgarh High Court Allows CENVAT Credit To BSNL On Towers

The Chhattisgarh High Court has allowed CENVAT Credit to Bharat Sanchar Nigam…

90 Days Period Prescribed Under Regulation 17(1) Of Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations 2018 Is Not Mandatory: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court has held that the 90 Days period prescribed…

CBIC Extends Levy Of Countervailing Duty On ‘Continuous Cast Copper Wire Rod’

The Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) has notified the…

Import Of E-Rickshaw Parts For Assembly Equals Import of Complete E-Rickshaw: CESTAT

The Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT)…