2018 (4) TMI 165 - AT - Customs

Classification of imported goods - Multimedia Speakers - whether classified under CTH 8519 8100 and 8527 9990 or otherwise? - Held that - Tribunal in the appellant s own case Logic India Trading Co Versus Commissioner of Customs 2016 (3) TMI 5 - CESTAT BANGALORE , where it was held that the goods in question are properly classifiable under Chapter Heading 8518 22 00 - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
Classification of imported goods under Tariff Heading 8519 8100 and 8527 9990 instead of 8518 2200.

Analysis:
The appellants, traders importing electronic goods, filed 7 appeals against orders passed by the Commissioner(Appeals) classifying goods under Tariff Heading 8519 8100 and 8527 9990. The appellants self-assessed the goods under CTH 8518 2200, but the Department reclassified them under different headings based on multifunctionality and a circular. The Commissioner(Appeals) upheld the reclassification, citing the circular and rejecting the appellant's claims. The appellant argued that previous classifications favored their claim, citing judicial precedents. The Tribunal considered past decisions and ruled in favor of the appellant, emphasizing the principal function of the goods as speakers, confirming classification under 8518 2200.

The Tribunal noted that the issue was settled by the Apex Court in the appellant's previous case, where the main function of the goods as speakers was crucial for classification under 8518 2200. Referring to interpretative rules and precedents, the Tribunal emphasized the primary role of the goods as speakers, supported by invoices, affidavits, and brochures. Drawing parallels with a Supreme Court decision on multifunctional machines, the Tribunal concluded that the predominant function determines classification. Based on these findings and the established legal principles, the Tribunal set aside the impugned orders, allowing all appeals and providing consequential reliefs.

In conclusion, the Tribunal's detailed analysis focused on the principal function of the imported goods as speakers, emphasizing past precedents and legal principles to support the classification under Tariff Heading 8518 2200. The decision highlighted the importance of the main function in determining classification, referencing judicial precedents and interpretative rules to support the appellant's claims and ultimately setting aside the Commissioner(Appeals) orders.