COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (IMPORT) vs BEETAL TELETECH LIMITED

Judgment text excerpt

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 13.01.2025 + CUSAA 30/2024 COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (IMPORT) .....Appellant Through: Mr Akshay Amritanshu, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr Samyak Jain, Ms Drishti Safar and Ms Pragya Upadhyay, Advocates. versus BEETAL TELETECH LIMITED .....Respondent Through: Mr Srinivas Kotni and Mr Shyam Kishor Maury, Advocates. CORAM HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE SWARANA KANTA SHARMA JUDGMENT SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J. INTRODUCTION 1. The Revenue has preferred the present appeal under Section 130A of the Customs Act, 1962 [hereafter „the Act‟] read with Section 174 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, impugning the order dated 30.10.2023 [hereafter „the impugned order‟] passed by the learned Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi [hereafter „the learned CESTAT‟], by way of which the appeal filed by the Revenue (Customs Appeal No. 51875 of 2021) was dismissed. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CUSAA 30/2024 Page 1 of 14 By:AANCHAL TAGGAR Signing Date:16.01.2025 12:33:08 QUESTION OF LAW 2. The principal controversy in the present case was captured by this Court in order dated 12.09.2023 (passed in CUSAA 38/2023) while framing the question of law, which is set out below: Whether the word “and” as appearing in CTl 8517 (iv) is to be read in a disjunctive manner and thus be viewed as referring to separate products? FACTUAL BACKGROUND 3. The facts, as discernible from the records, are that the respondent, Beetal Teletech Limited [hereafter also referred to as „the respondent‟], is a distributor of Information Technology products in India. During the period July, 2014 to June, 2017, the respondent imported Wireless Access Points (WAPs) from variou