2008 (3) TMI 151 - AT - Central Excise

Classification of imported electronic panels - assessee claimed classification under 8473.30 CTH but department claimed under 8537.10 impugned items are specifically designed for use as an accessory in computer systems, not for electric control or for distribution of electricity hence assessee s claim for classification under 8473 is justified

Summary

Issues: Classification of imported goods under 8473.30 CTH or 8537.10

In this judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Bangalore, the issue at hand is the classification of imported electronic panels under either 8473.30 CTH as claimed by the appellant or 8537.10 as contended by the department. The appellant argued that the panels, known as patch panels, are used for connecting hardware in telecommunications closets and should be classified under 8473.30 as accessories for automatic data processing machines falling under 8471. On the other hand, the department argued for classification under 8537.10, citing the description covering boards, panels, consoles, etc., for electric control or distribution of electricity. The Tribunal analyzed the function and design of the imported items to determine the appropriate classification.

The Tribunal considered the specific use and design of the impugned goods, patch panels, which are used to connect different hardware falling under 84.71, and transmit information and data, rather than being used for electric control or distribution of electricity as contended by the department under CTH 8537.10. The lower authorities had overlooked this crucial aspect. By examining Chapter Heading 8473, which covers parts and accessories suitable for use with machines falling under 84.71, the Tribunal found merit in the appellant's argument that the patch panels were specifically designed for use as accessories in computer systems falling under 84.71, supporting their classification under 8473.30. The Tribunal also referred to a previous decision upheld by the Supreme Court regarding the classification of "cable assembly" designed for use in computers, which further supported the appellant's position. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal, providing consequential relief to the appellant.

The judgment highlights the importance of considering the specific function and design of imported goods for accurate classification under the relevant Customs Tariff Headings. It underscores the need for a thorough analysis of the intended use and characteristics of the goods to determine the appropriate classification, as demonstrated in the comparison between Chapter Heading 8473 and 8537.10 in this case. The reference to previous precedents further strengthens the Tribunal's decision in favor of the appellant, emphasizing the consistency and applicability of established principles in classification disputes.