2008 (3) TMI 146 - AT - Customs

Applicability of the Not. 6/06 when CPU along with monitor mouse & key board are cleared as a set monitors are cleared along with other items as a set so benefit cannot be denied only to monitors even if goods are indicated separately in invoices & B/E under notification 24/05 benefit of basic customs duty to monitors is available only when they are classifiable under 852841 852851 & 852861 - Since imported monitors are meant only for computers not for TV the benefit should be given

Summary

Issues involved:
1. Whether the benefit of exemption Notification No.6/2006 dated 1.3.2006 is available to computer monitors imported along with CPU.
2. Whether the appellants are entitled to the benefit of Notification No.24/2005 for monitors imported without CPU.

Analysis:
1. The appellants imported desktop computers with various components, including monitors. The first issue revolved around the applicability of the exemption Notification No.6/2006 dated 1.3.2006 to computer monitors imported alongside CPUs. The Notification specified a CVD rate of 12% for computers. The Tribunal noted that the monitors were not granted the 12% benefit by the Revenue, citing separate classification under 85.28. However, the Tribunal disagreed with this stance, emphasizing that the benefit should apply when the CPU and monitor are cleared together as a set, regardless of separate classification. The Tribunal criticized the lower authorities for not extending the benefit based on separate classification in invoices or bills of entry. It held that as long as the goods were presented together, the exemption should not be denied, ruling in favor of granting the benefit to monitors imported with CPUs under Notification No.6/2006.

2. The second issue pertained to whether the appellants could avail the benefit of Notification No.24/2005 for monitors imported separately from CPUs. The Tribunal highlighted that the monitors were procured for desktop computer use, even though initially misclassified. The Commissioner acknowledged this error and remanded the matter for a detailed order. The Tribunal agreed that since the monitors were intended for desktop computers and not other purposes, they should qualify for the benefit under Heading 852841, 852851, and 852861. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the appeals, emphasizing that the benefit of basic customs duty should be granted to monitors meant solely for computer use. The judgment was pronounced on 10.03.2008 by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Bangalore, with detailed analysis provided by Members Dr. S.L. Peeran and Shri T. K. Jayaraman.