9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (3) TMI 252 - AT - CustomsClassification - LCD Panel - Whether to be classified under Tariff Item 9013 8010 of the Customs Tariff Act and is entitled for the benefit of BCD exemption under Notification No. 24/2005 or under Tariff Item 8529 9090 - Held that based on HSN which has described LCD and from the fact that the wordings contained in CTH 9013 8010 are different from other entries dealing with LCD Technology. Also Tariff Heading 9013 covers LCD not constituting Article provided for more specifically in other headings. Explanatory Notes to the Heading 9013 also provide similarly and the panel under dispute are not described more specifically in any other heading. Therefore, the specific mention of LCD in Tariff Item 9013 8010 is more specific. Relied on the judgment of Tribunal in the appellant s own case M/s Samsung India Electronics Pvt Ltd, M/s Moser Baer India Ltd Versus Commissioner of Customs, Noida 2015 (10) TMI 2258 - CESTAT NEW DELHI, where the LCD s are more specifically covered under 9013 80 10 vis- -vis their general coverage under CTH 8529. - Decided in favour of appellant with consequential relief
Issues Involved:
1. Classification of imported LCD Panels. 2. Applicability of Basic Customs Duty (BCD) exemption under specific tariff headings. 3. Interpretation of General Interpretative Rules (GIR) and relevant section/chapter notes. 4. Precedential value of prior Tribunal and Supreme Court decisions on similar issues. Detailed Analysis: 1. Classification of Imported LCD Panels: The primary issue revolves around the correct classification of the imported LCD Panels. The appellant classified the goods under Tariff item 90138010, claiming they were "Liquid Crystal Devices" (LCDs). The assessing officer, however, reclassified them under Tariff item 85299090, arguing that they were more appropriately categorized as parts suitable for use with monitors. 2. Applicability of Basic Customs Duty (BCD) Exemption: The appellant claimed the benefit of BCD exemption under Sl. No. 29 of Notification No. 24/2005-Cus for goods classified under Tariff item 90138010. The assessing officer's reclassification under Tariff item 85299090 also allowed for BCD exemption under Sl. No. 18 of the same notification. The appellant argued that the classification under 90138010 was more specific and thus should be preferred. 3. Interpretation of General Interpretative Rules (GIR) and Relevant Section/Chapter Notes: The appellant contended that for classification disputes, the General Interpretative Rules (GIR) must be applied sequentially. GIR 1 states that classification should be based on the terms of the headings and any relevant section or chapter notes. The appellant argued that the term "Liquid Crystal Devices" was not defined in the section or chapter notes but was described in the Harmonized System of Nomenclature (HSN). They emphasized that LCDs, as described in HSN, should fall under Tariff item 90138010, which covers all kinds of liquid crystal devices. 4. Precedential Value of Prior Tribunal and Supreme Court Decisions: The appellant relied on prior decisions, including a recent Tribunal decision in their own case, which classified similar goods under Tariff item 90138010. The Tribunal decision highlighted that the imported goods, which included components like liquid crystal panels, drivers, backlight units, and inverters, were considered "Liquid Crystal Devices" (LCDs) and thus fell under 90138010. The Supreme Court's decision in "Secure Meters Ltd. Vs. CCE" further supported this classification, emphasizing that LCDs are specifically mentioned in CTH 9013 and should be classified there unless more specifically provided for in other headings. Conclusion: After reviewing the arguments and precedents, the Tribunal concluded that the imported LCD panels were more specifically covered under Tariff item 90138010. The Tribunal noted that the description "Liquid Crystal Devices" in CTH 9013 was more specific than the general description of parts in CTH 8529. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with consequential reliefs. Operative Part of the Order: The Tribunal pronounced the operative part of the order in open court, setting aside the impugned order and allowing the appeal with any consequential reliefs.
|
