Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases GST GST + AAAR GST - 2019 (8) TMI AAAR This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2019 (8) TMI 943 - AAAR - GST


Issues Involved:

1. Classification of the "Power Bank" under the appropriate Harmonized System of Nomenclature (HSN) code.
2. Determination of whether the "Power Bank" should be classified under Chapter Heading 8504 as a Static Converter or under Chapter Heading 8507 as an Electrical Accumulator.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Classification of the "Power Bank":

The primary issue is to determine the correct classification of the "Power Bank" under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The appellant classified the Power Bank under HSN code 8504 40 90 as 'Static Converter-others' while the Karnataka Authority for Advance Ruling classified it under Heading 8507 as an Accumulator.

2. Determination of Classification under Chapter Heading 8504 or 8507:

Appellant's Arguments:

- The appellant argued that the Power Bank should be classified as a Static Converter because it involves the conversion of electrical energy. The Power Bank includes a charge management system and a voltage boost converter which are integral to its function of charging devices.
- The appellant highlighted that the charge management system reduces the input voltage to a constant 4.2V DC required for the battery, and the voltage boost converter adjusts the output voltage to match the requirements of the device being charged.
- They submitted that an accumulator cannot itself charge another battery without a static converter, and the Power Bank's principal function is to charge connected devices, which is performed by the static converter components.
- The appellant relied on a technical research report from the Indian Institute of Technology (Banaras Hindu University) which concluded that the Power Bank can be considered a Static Converter and not only a charge accumulator.
- They also referenced the judgment in the case of C.E.G.S.T-Delhi vs SB Industries, where it was held that a power bank is primarily used to charge mobile batteries and should be classified differently from an accumulator.

Authority's Findings:

- The authority noted that the Power Bank consists of a lithium-ion polymer battery, a charge management system, and a voltage boost converter. The battery stores electrical energy, and the converters regulate and convert the charge.
- The authority emphasized that the primary difference between a Static Converter and an Accumulator is the storage of electrical energy. A Static Converter does not store electrical energy, whereas an Accumulator does.
- The authority reviewed the HSN Explanatory Notes which state that accumulators include ancillary components that contribute to the function of storing and supplying energy. The Power Bank, with its battery and converters, fits this description.
- The authority dismissed the appellant's reliance on the technical report from IIT (BHU) Varanasi, stating that the report was not conclusive and did not categorically state that the Power Bank is a Static Converter.
- The authority also dismissed the relevance of the Delhi Tribunal's decision in the case of S.B Industries, noting that the Tribunal did not determine the classification of the Power Bank but only its eligibility for an exemption notification.
- The authority distinguished the Power Bank from an Uninterruptible Power Supply (UPS) system, noting that the UPS involves converting DC to AC, whereas the Power Bank involves converting DC to DC.

Conclusion:

- The authority concluded that the Power Bank is classifiable as an Electrical Accumulator under Chapter Heading 8507. This conclusion is supported by the HSN Explanatory Notes and the recent changes in GST rates which classify Lithium-ion Power Banks under Chapter Heading 8507.
- The appeal filed by the appellant was dismissed, and the order of the Advance Ruling Authority classifying the Power Bank under Heading 8507 was upheld.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates