9911796707
|
Home
Issues: Classification of imported goods as aluminum extruded tubes or part of air-conditioner under different tariff headings.
In the judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, New Delhi, two appeals were filed by M/s. Sanden Vikas (India) Ltd. challenging separate orders issued by the Collector of Customs, Madras, and the Additional Collector of Customs, New Delhi. The primary issue in both appeals was the classification of the imported goods, declared by the appellant as aluminum extruded tubes under Heading No. 7608.10, and classified by the Revenue as part of an air-conditioner under Heading No. 8415.90. The tribunal combined both appeals for a common order due to the similarity of the classification issue. In the detailed analysis, the tribunal considered the arguments presented by the Advocate for the appellants and the Senior Departmental Representative for the Revenue. The Additional Collector of Customs had examined a sample from the consignment and noted that the product was a hollow rectangle cross-section with numerous fins integrally attached, bent at an angle of almost 180o multiple times. Based on the characteristics of the product, the tribunal concluded that classification under sub-heading No. 7608.10 for aluminum tubes was not appropriate as per the tariff definition. The appellants had alternatively claimed classification under sub-heading No. 8419.90 for parts of machinery, plant, or equipment under Heading No. 84.19. They argued that the imported goods were components of a condenser, which they contended was a type of heat exchanger. However, after reviewing the product literature and descriptions, the tribunal found that the goods did not meet the criteria for classification under Heading No. 84.19. Additionally, the tribunal dismissed the possibility of classification under Heading No. 76.16 for other aluminum articles as the goods were specifically designed for car air conditioning applications. Referring to a previous case, the tribunal emphasized that parts specially designed for a particular apparatus should be classified under the heading covering that apparatus. The tribunal noted that the goods in question were described in the invoice as automotive air conditioning components and were correctly classifiable under sub-heading No. 8415.90 as parts of air conditioning machines. Ultimately, considering all relevant factors, the tribunal upheld the classification by the adjudicating authorities and rejected both appeals. In conclusion, the judgment addressed the classification dispute between aluminum extruded tubes and parts of air-conditioners under different tariff headings, emphasizing the importance of product characteristics and intended use in determining the appropriate classification for imported goods.
|
