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 Customs Customs + AT Customs - 1997 (9) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

1997 (9) TMI 234 - AT - Customs

Issues: Classification of imported goods under Customs Tariff

Detailed Analysis:

Issue 1: Classification of back mount frame under Customs Tariff
The case involved the classification of imported goods, specifically a back mount frame used in telecommunication, under the Customs Tariff. The appellant sought classification under sub-heading No. 8538.90, claiming a concessional rate of customs duty. However, the Asstt. Collector classified the goods under sub-heading No. 8517.90, considering them as part of transmission equipment used in telecommunication. On appeal, the Collector, Customs (Appeals) upheld this classification, stating that the goods were steel frames for mounting connectors ultimately used in telephone exchanges.

Issue 2: Interpretation of Customs Tariff headings
The Tribunal analyzed the relevant Customs Tariff headings to determine the correct classification of the goods. They noted that Heading Nos. 85.35 and 85.36 covered electrical apparatus for switching or protecting electrical circuits, not specifically for telecommunication. The goods in question were steel frames with connectors for line telephony, falling under Heading No. 85.17 for electrical apparatus for line telephony or telegraphy. The Tribunal referred to the HSN Explanatory Notes to support their interpretation.

Issue 3: Examination of goods and intended use
The Tribunal examined the nature of the imported goods, which were steel frames with holes for terminal blocks used in automatic telephone exchanges. They emphasized that the connectors mounted on the frames were for line telephony, not for electrical control or distribution of electricity. The Tribunal considered the product literature and invoice descriptions, which clearly indicated the goods were meant for telecommunication purposes.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal found no error in the classification done by the Collector, Customs (Appeals) and rejected the appeal. They concluded that the goods, being steel frames for mounting connectors used in telephone exchanges, fell under Heading No. 85.17 for telecommunication components, not under headings related to electrical control or distribution of electricity. The decision was based on a thorough analysis of the Customs Tariff, the nature of the goods, and their intended use in telecommunication applications.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates