9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2025 (4) TMI 1295 - AT - CustomsClassification of imported goods - Toshiba Air conditioner Outdoor unit - Toshiba Air Conditioner Indoor units - to be classified under CTH 8515 9000 thereby availing the benefit of Customs Notification No.46/2011 Sl. No. 1103(1) or under CTH 8415 8110? - HELD THAT - After going through the orders that the Tribunal has considered the contentions of the Revenue for denying the benefit of notification and ordering re-classification per OIO for the reasons given thereunder and it has been clearly laid down that the goods in question would fall under CTH 84159000 as parts . In view of the above and following the judicial discipline there are no merit in the impugned order which calls for setting aside the same. Conclusion - Indoor and outdoor units of multi-split air conditioners operating on Variable Refrigerant Flow technology imported together as a combination are classifiable as parts under CTH 8415 9000. Appeal allowed.
The core legal questions considered by the Tribunal in this appeal are:
(i) Whether the imported goods-comprising various models of Toshiba air conditioner outdoor and indoor units-are classifiable under Customs Tariff Heading (CTH) 8415 9000 as claimed by the importer or under CTH 8415 8110 as held by the Revenue; (ii) Whether the imported goods are eligible for the benefit of Customs Notification No. 46/2011, Sl. No. 1103(1); (iii) Whether the imported goods are liable for confiscation under Section 111(m) of the Customs Act, 1962; (iv) Whether the importer is liable to penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. Regarding the first issue of classification, the relevant legal framework includes the Customs Tariff Act and the General Rules of Interpretation (GRI) of the Import Tariff. The Revenue relied on the Explanatory Notes to sub-heading 8415.90, which include indoor and outdoor units of split system air conditioners as parts when imported separately. The Revenue's position was that since the imported outdoor units were of more than 2-ton capacity and the indoor units and outdoor units had separate power supplies, the goods were not parts but complete air conditioners and thus classifiable under CTH 8415 8110, which covers air conditioners of 2 tons and above capacity with reversible heat pumps. The Revenue further argued that the absence of refrigerating pipes and 'Y' joints-although essential for connecting indoor and outdoor units-did not render the imported goods incomplete or parts, as these accessories are generally supplied separately and do not alter the basic function of the air conditioner. The importer contended that the outdoor and indoor units were imported as a combination, with one outdoor unit connected to multiple indoor units, constituting a multi-split air conditioner working on Variable Refrigerant Flow (VRF) technology. The importer relied on Circular No. 666/57/2002-CX dated 25.09.2002 issued by CBIC, which lists six essential components for a refrigeration cycle, including the evaporator coil, condenser coil, motor, fan/blower, compressor, and capillary line (expansion valve). The importer emphasized that certain components such as the capillary line and control system were not imported, which are crucial for a VRF system, indicating that the imported goods were parts and not complete air conditioners. The importer further relied on precedents from coordinate Benches of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), including a Mumbai Bench decision and a recent Chennai Bench order, which held that indoor and outdoor units used in VRF air conditioners are classifiable under CTH 8415 9000 as parts of air conditioners. The Tribunal's interpretation and reasoning involved a detailed examination of the technical specifications and the nature of the goods. It noted that the imported goods were multi-split air conditioners operating on VRF technology, where one outdoor unit connects to multiple indoor units, each with separate power supplies. The Tribunal observed that the Revenue's reliance on the absence of refrigerating pipes and 'Y' joints was insufficient to treat the goods as complete air conditioners rather than parts, especially since these items are usually supplied as accessories. The Tribunal also applied Rule 2 of the General Rules of Interpretation, which provides that a reference to an article includes incomplete or unfinished articles provided they have the essential character of the complete article. The Tribunal found that the imported goods maintained the essential character of parts of air conditioners and were thus rightly classifiable under CTH 8415 9000. In addressing the competing arguments, the Tribunal gave significant weight to the circular issued by CBIC and the decisions of coordinate Benches, which had carefully analyzed similar facts and technical aspects. The Tribunal emphasized the principle of judicial discipline in following precedents unless there is a compelling reason to deviate. It found that the Revenue's classification under CTH 8415 8110 was not sustainable in light of the technical nature of the goods and the established legal principles. Regarding the eligibility for the benefit of Customs Notification No. 46/2011, Sl. No. 1103(1), since the Tribunal held the imported goods to be parts under CTH 8415 9000, the importer was entitled to claim the benefit of the notification. The Revenue's denial of this benefit was thus set aside. The issues of confiscation under Section 111(m) and penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act were not elaborated in detail in the impugned order or the appeal submissions. However, by allowing the appeal on classification and benefit of notification, the Tribunal implicitly negated the basis for confiscation and penalty, which typically arise from misclassification or suppression of facts. Since the importer's classification was upheld, no liability for confiscation or penalty was sustained. The significant holdings of the Tribunal include the following verbatim legal reasoning: "In view of the above and following the judicial discipline, we do not find any merit in the impugned order, which calls for setting aside the same, which we hereby do." The core principles established by the Tribunal are:
In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned orders of classification and denial of notification benefit, and granted consequential relief as per law.
|
