2009 (12) TMI 423 - AT - Customs

Classification import of Uni-Lite XCEL - Appellant claimed classification under CTH 9027.80 as an instrument for measuring quantity of light. The authorities below have classified the same under CTH 9031.80 as measuring or checking device not specified elsewhere. Held that - that the impugned goods is not an instrument for measurement of light, rather it is an instrument for measuring ATP levels thereby determining contamination/cleanliness levels of surfaces and liquids. Therefore, it cannot be classified under the Heading specific to light meters. The residuary entry under 9031.80 which covers other instruments is the more appropriate heading.

Summary

Issues: Classification of imported instrument under CTH 9027.80 or 9031.80

In this case, the issue revolved around the classification of the imported instrument 'Uni-Lite XCEL' under the Customs Tariff Heading (CTH) 9027.80 as claimed by the appellants or under CTH 9031.80 as determined by the authorities below. The appellants argued that the instrument measured light to determine pollution content, while the Department contended that it measured ATP levels to determine contamination levels, not light.

Analysis:

The learned Counsel for the appellants contended that the 'Uni-Lite XCEL' should be classified under Heading 90.27 as it falls under instruments for measuring quantities of light. The instrument works by detecting ATP levels using Biotrace reagents, emitting light which is measured to indicate cleanliness or contamination levels. The Counsel referenced the Heading 90.27 and Explanatory Notes to support the classification under instruments for measuring light. They emphasized the alphanumeric display and color-coded results as evidence of measuring light for pollution content determination.

On the other hand, the Department argued that the instrument is used to determine contamination levels, not measure light like luxmeters do. They highlighted that the instrument measures ATP levels, not illumination units like lux. After examining the product catalogues, it was found that the instrument does not measure illumination in lux units but rather ATP levels to indicate contamination levels. The Tribunal concluded that the instrument is a hygiene testing instrument rather than a luxmeter for measuring light.

The Tribunal further analyzed the classification under Heading 90.27, noting that light measuring instruments are specified in a separate part which does not include the impugned instrument. Refractometers, which are mentioned in the first part of Heading 90.27, do not automatically classify the impugned instrument under the third part for light measuring instruments. Additionally, the Tribunal considered the argument regarding the residuary entry, citing a Supreme Court order, and concluded that since the instrument measures ATP levels for contamination/cleanliness determination, it is more appropriately classified under the residuary entry 9031.80 for other instruments.

In the final decision, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal, affirming the classification of the 'Uni-Lite XCEL' under CTH 9031.80 as an instrument for measuring contamination levels rather than under CTH 9027.80 for measuring quantities of light. The classification was based on the instrument's function of measuring ATP levels to determine cleanliness or contamination levels of surfaces and liquids.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the arguments presented by both parties, the examination of relevant headings and explanatory notes, and the ultimate decision reached by the Tribunal regarding the classification of the imported instrument.