2023 (12) TMI 447 - AT - Customs

Classification of imported goods - Mi Web Camera - to be classified under Chapter Heading 8473 3099 as parts and accessories of Automatic Data Processing (ADP) Machines or under Chapter heading 8525 8010? - HELD THAT - The impugned order does not dispute the fact that this Web Cameras satisfies the condition laid down under Chapter Note 5(C) and to be excluded from Chapter 8471, it needs to fall under one of the exclusions as specified under Chapter Note 5(D) - The Web Camera cannot be considered as television camera or digital camera or a video camera recorder. Hence, it definitely falls under Chapter Heading 8471. As per Chapter Note 5(C) and 5(D), the items are rightly classifiable under Chapter Heading 8471 as long as they satisfy the conditions laid therein and there is no dispute that these conditions have not been satisfied, the item has been excluded from Chapter 8471 only on the ground that Chapter Note 5(D) excludes television camera, digital cameras and video camera recorders. Moreover, the imported items web cameras are used principally with the ADP machines is not under dispute - The imported item under question is a web camera and as has been already decided in the case of HI-TECH COMPUTERS VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, BANGALORE 2004 (9) TMI 262 - CESTAT, BANGALORE , the Tribunal has clearly distinguished that the web cameras are not digital camera nor it can be considered as a television camera. Therefore, the web cameras are rightly classifiable under Chapter Heading 8473 as claimed by the appellant and not under Chapter Heading 8525 as classified by the Department. Thus, Mi Web Cameras are rightly classifiable under Chapter Heading 8473 - the impugned order set aside - appeal allowed.

Summary

Issues Involved:
Classification of Mi Web Camera under Chapter Heading 8473 or Chapter Heading 8525.

Summary:

Issue 1: Classification under Chapter Heading 8473

The appellant imported Mi Web Camera and classified it under Chapter Heading 8473 3099 as parts and accessories of Automatic Data Processing (ADP) Machines. The appellant argued that the web camera is solely used with ADP machines, captures images/video, and is suitable for use with machines of Heading 8470 to 8471. Citing precedents and Chapter Note 5(E), the appellant contended that the web camera should be classified under Chapter Heading 8473. The appellant emphasized that the web camera does not have an identifiable individual function and cannot work independently, supporting their classification claim.

Issue 2: Classification under Chapter Heading 8525

The Respondent, however, classified the web camera under Chapter Heading 8525 8010, stating that it should be considered under the category of television camera, digital camera, or video camera recorders. The Respondent referred to HSN Explanatory Notes to support this classification. The dispute revolved around whether the web camera satisfied the conditions under Chapter Note 5(C) and the exclusions under Chapter Note 5(D) for classification under Chapter 8471.

Judgment:

The Tribunal analyzed the arguments presented by both parties and referred to past judgments, including the case of Hi-Tech Computers. The Tribunal noted that the web camera imported by the appellant was not an ordinary camera and could only function when connected to a computer. Considering the nature of the product and the relevant Chapter Notes, the Tribunal held that the Mi Web Cameras were rightly classifiable under Chapter Heading 8473. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal of the appellant was allowed.

Separate Judgment:
No separate judgment was delivered by the judges in this case.