2022 (5) TMI 495 - AT - Customs

Classification of import goods - Multimedia Speakers - to be classified under CTH 8518 2200 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 as Multiple Loud Speakers mounted in the same enclosure or under CTH 8519 8100 for Speakers with USB playback and 8527 9100 for Speakers with FM Radio feature - HELD THAT - The issue has already been settled by this Tribunal in appellant s own case,LOGIC INDIA TRADING CO VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS 2016 (3) TMI 5 - CESTAT BANGALORE , wherein the Tribunal was posed with the classification of Multimedia Speakers of three types as imported by the appellant, viz. Speakers without USB port or FM; Speakers with additional functions of USB playback and Speakers with FM Radio and USB playback. Upon analyzing the legal provisions, the rules provided under the General Rules of Interpretation, common parlance theory etc., the Tribunal has held that though the Multimedia Speakers under consideration have additional features, the main and principal function of the product is as a Speaker and therefore, the goods in question are classifiable under CTH 8518 2200. The impugned order passed in changing the classification of the disputed goods cannot be sustained - Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues: Classification of imported goods under Customs Tariff Act, 1975

Analysis:
The case involved the classification of imported electronic goods, specifically 'Multimedia Speakers,' by the appellant for clearance under CTH 8518 2200 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The Department rejected this classification and re-classified the goods under CTH 8519 8100 for Speakers with USB playback and 8527 9100 for Speakers with FM Radio feature, applying Notification No. 49/2008-C.T. (N.T.) dated 24/12/2008 for CVD assessment. The appellant challenged this re-classification through appeals, leading to the Order-in-Appeal Nos. 438-440/2013 and Order-in-Original 328/2014. The subsequent appeal before the learned Commissioner (Appeals) resulted in the impugned Order-in-Appeal No. 225/2015, confirming the Department's classification. The appellant then approached the Tribunal, contesting the classification of the goods.

The Tribunal referred to its previous decision in the appellant's case, where it had classified 'Multimedia Speakers' based on their main function as speakers, under CTH 8518 2200. Citing legal provisions, General Rules of Interpretation, and common parlance theory, the Tribunal emphasized that the primary function of the goods was as a speaker, despite additional features like USB playback and FM Radio. The Tribunal's analysis highlighted that the goods were commonly traded and sold as speakers, supporting their classification under CTH 8518 2200. The Tribunal also drew parallels with a Supreme Court decision involving multifunctional printing machines, reinforcing the importance of the predominant function in classification. The Tribunal noted that the Department's appeal against its previous decision had been dismissed by the Supreme Court, further solidifying the classification of 'Multimedia Speakers' under CTH 8518 2200.

Based on the precedents set by its previous decision and the Supreme Court's dismissal of the Department's appeal, the Tribunal concluded that the classification of 'Multimedia Speakers' was no longer a matter open for debate. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal in favor of the appellant, highlighting the clarity and consistency in the classification of the goods as per established legal interpretations.

(Operation portion of the order was pronounced in the Open Court on 05/05/2022)