2008 (10) TMI 217 - AT - Customs

Desk Top Computers - Import of various items - to be treated as sets or separate items - Exemption from CVD - Notification no;. 6/2006 CE dated 1-3-2006 - Held that - The article must be judged on the basis of its nature at the time of its importation. - In the present case as the CPU monitor key-board and mouse have been imported and one Bill of Entry has been filed in respect of all these items therefore it cannot be said that the same have not been imported in sets. Explanation in the notification in question provides that concessional rate of duty is applicable to the computer and for the purpose of exemption computer shall include CPU separately; or CPU with monitor mouse and key board cleared together as a set. After taking into consideration the provisions of the Notification the Tribunal in the appellants own case held that Monitor imported along with CPU are entitled to the benefit of notification No. 6/2006

Summary

Issues:
1. Benefit of Notification No. 6/2006 for import of Desk Top Computers - CPU and monitor classification.
2. Assessment of items separately under their Tariff Headings.
3. Applicability of the benefit of notification when CPU along with monitor, mouse, and key board are cleared as a set.
4. Interpretation of the notification's explanation regarding the classification and import of items.

Analysis:
1. The case involved the import of Desk Top Computers where the appellants claimed the benefit of Notification No. 6/2006 for CPU but were denied the benefit for the monitor. The Commissioner (Appeals) held that since the items were mentioned separately in the Bills of Entry, they should be assessed separately under their Tariff Headings.

2. The appellants argued that as the computers were imported in sets, the benefit of the notification should apply. They relied on a previous Tribunal decision where the benefit was allowed for monitors imported along with CPU. The Revenue contended that separate mention in Bills of Entry necessitates separate assessment, citing precedents to support their stance.

3. The Tribunal noted that the appellants filed a single Bill of Entry for CPU, monitor, key-board, and mouse. It was observed that the case laws cited by the Revenue were not applicable as the goods were imported together. The Tribunal emphasized that the nature of the items at the time of importation should determine their classification, especially when imported as a set.

4. Referring to the notification's explanation, the Tribunal highlighted that the concessional rate applied to the computer, including CPU separately or with monitor, mouse, and key board as a set. Relying on the previous decision in the appellants' case, the Tribunal concluded that the benefit of the notification should extend to monitors imported along with CPU, regardless of separate classification in invoices or Bills of Entry.

5. Consequently, the impugned orders were set aside, and the appeals were allowed in favor of the appellants. The Tribunal directed that the appellants were entitled to consequential relief as per the law, based on the interpretation of the notification and the nature of the imported items presented together as a set.