9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved:
Correct classification of Climate Test Cabinet System imported by M/s VDO India Ltd. Analysis: The appeals were filed against the Order in Original (OIA) dated 27-11-01 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Chennai. The main issue revolved around the proper classification of the Climate Test Cabinet System imported by M/s VDO India Ltd., Bangalore. The Commissioner (Appeals) classified the item under sub-heading 9031.80, while M/s VDO contended that it should be classified under 9027.80. The Revenue argued that the equipment does not facilitate reading test results or measuring parameters, thus not qualifying as testing equipment, and should be classified under sub-heading 8543.89 of the Customs Tariff. The learned Advocate representing the appellants argued that the imported item creates different climatic conditions to test products' endurance under various temperature conditions. He cited a case law to support the classification under sub-heading 9027.80. On the other hand, the JCDR for the Revenue contended that sub-heading 9027 pertains to instruments measuring parameters like viscosity, porosity, etc., which the apparatus in question does not do. She highlighted a contradiction in the Commissioner (Appeals) Order, stating that it classified the goods under CH 90.31 despite acknowledging that they do not measure parameters. After considering the arguments, the Tribunal examined sub-heading 9027, which covers instruments and apparatus for physical or chemical analysis. The Tribunal noted that the equipment in question is used to test the functionality of products under temperature variations, indicating the temperature at which the products may break down. The temperature range of the equipment was from -70^0C to 130^0C, allowing for determining the breakdown temperature. Therefore, the Tribunal concluded that the apparatus qualifies as an apparatus for physical analysis under 9027.80. The Tribunal rejected the Revenue's contention that the item should be classified under 8543.89 as an electrical item. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed M/s VDO's appeal and dismissed the Revenue's appeal. In conclusion, the Tribunal's decision was based on the interpretation of the Customs Tariff sub-headings and the functionality of the imported equipment in testing products under varying climatic conditions. The judgment clarified that the apparatus's ability to analyze physical aspects, such as determining the temperature at which products break down, justified its classification under sub-heading 9027.80, rejecting the Revenue's argument for a different classification under sub-heading 8543.89.
|
