2022 (6) TMI 1089 - AT - Customs

Classification of imported goods - Controller Assembly - Bolt - Nut - Screw - Rivet - goods declared as Components for Suzuki Vehicles, correct or not - whether the Controlled Assembly CVT imported by the appellant is classifiable under CTH 9032 and other items imported are classifiable under CTH 7318 as declared by the appellant or under CTH 8708 as parts and accessories of motor vehicles of heading 8701 to 8705 as assessed by the Customs? - HELD THAT - The Commissioner (Appeals) while deciding the classification of the disputed goods, in question, under heading 8708, has not given any finding as to whether all the above conditions which are very important for deciding the classification of goods, satisfy / comply in respect of the disputed goods. The Commissioner (Appeals) findings are silent on this vital aspect of the relevant provisions - It is also found that Learned Commissioner (Appeals) in impugned order not given his finding related to classification of goods individually item wise. Whereas Appellant produced the list of 14 items imported vide above Bills of Entry. The lower authorities have not examined the legal aspects properly to come to conclusion for correct classification of the goods in question. Hence in our considered view the matter needs to be remitted back to the Commissioner (Appeals) - Appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
Classification of imported goods under CTH 8708, CTH 7318, and CTH 9032.

Analysis:
1. The appellant imported goods declared as "Components for Suzuki Vehicles" but were classified under CTH 8708 by the Assistant Commissioner, upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals). The appellant argued that bolts, nuts, screws, rivets, etc., made of steel should be classified under CTH 7318, as per HSN Explanatory Notes. They contended that even if goods are designed for motor vehicles, they should not be classified under Chapter 87 if excluded under Note 2 to Section XVII. The appellant relied on the Supreme Court judgment in CCE Vs Uniproducts Ltd. to support their argument that specific headings should be preferred over general headings.

2. The appellant also argued that the Controller Assembly AT should be classified under CTH 9032 as it meets the criteria specified in the HSN Explanatory Notes. They provided detailed explanations and referred to various judgments to support their claim. They contended that the goods imported do not satisfy all conditions prescribed in HSN to Section XVII and should not be classified under CTH 8708.

3. On the other hand, the Revenue argued that the imported goods are parts and accessories solely used with automobiles and should be classified under CTH 8708. They cited various decisions to support their claim, emphasizing that the goods were declared as "components of Suzuki Vehicles" by the appellant.

4. The Tribunal observed that the Commissioner (Appeals) did not address whether the conditions for classifying goods under CTH 8708 were satisfied. They noted that the lower authorities did not examine the legal aspects properly for the correct classification of goods. Therefore, the matter was remitted back to the Commissioner (Appeals) for further examination.

5. In conclusion, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter to the Commissioner (Appeals) for reevaluation. The appeal was allowed by way of remand for further classification determination.