2019 (2) TMI 1403 - AT - Customs

Reclassification of goods - Drawings and Design for 33M2 Sinter Plant - whether classified under CTH 8417 or under CTH 49060000? - Held that - What is sought to be imported is drawings and design and not the plant per se and from the Order-in-Original - Also, the adjudicating authority has nowhere discussed as to how the drawings and design require re-classification. Therefore, a finding was required by the adjudicating authority as to how the drawings and design sought to be imported could be categorized as either nuclear reactor or boiler or machinery and mechanical appliances, to be covered under Chapter 84 - Revenue has not made out any case to justify intervention - appeal of Revenue dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Classification of goods under CTH 8417 vs. CTH 49060000.

Analysis:
The case involved a dispute over the classification of "Drawings and Design for 33M2 Sinter Plant" under Customs Tariff Heading (CTH) 8417 as opposed to CTH 49060000. The appellant, Revenue, challenged the Order of Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) which set aside the re-classification attempt. The drawings were supplied by a company as per a contract, and the importer argued that the construction and erection of buildings were within their scope, not related to machinery performance. The adjudicating authority initially re-classified the goods under CTH 8417, but the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) rejected this decision, allowing the appeal by the respondent.

During the hearing, both parties presented their arguments, and the Tribunal examined the documents and referenced legal decisions. The Tribunal noted that the goods imported were drawings and design, not the plant itself. It was observed that the adjudicating authority did not explain why re-classification was necessary. The Tribunal compared the headings of Chapter 49 and Chapter 84 to determine the appropriate classification. Chapter 49 pertains to printed materials, while Chapter 84 relates to machinery and mechanical appliances.

The Tribunal agreed with the Commissioner (Appeals) that the drawings and design did not fit the classification under Chapter 84, as they were not machinery or mechanical appliances. As the Revenue failed to justify intervention, the Tribunal dismissed their appeal. The decision was pronounced in open court, upholding the Commissioner (Appeals) ruling and rejecting the Revenue's appeal.