9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 1439X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... R) For the Respondent ORDER The appellant is aggrieved by the order dt. 10.1.2008 of Commissioner of Customs (Import) Custom House, Chennai. 2. Appellant imported and filed Bill of Entry for clearance of External VGA Box. The dispute in the present appeal relates to the classification of the said product and also correct valuation for duty purpose. Appellant claimed classifica ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nment through Nhava Sheva Customs with a value of US$ 14.63 and accordingly the value declared in Chennai of US$ 13.35 was rejected and reassessed on the basis of value assessed at Nhava Sheva port. 3. Ld. Counsel for the appellant submitted that the nature and function of the impugned goods are correctly captured in the impugned order. On this, there is no dispute. Original authority ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ally with the video or TV monitor, the same cannot be classified as part or accessory of such items. Admittedly, the tuner boxes are solely or principally used with computer monitor only. Accordingly, we find that classification under Chapter 84 is more appropriate than under Chapter 85. However, we note that the classification adopted by the appellant under sub heading 84733030 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the assessing officer. In the present case, the impugned goods were imported three months after import through Nhava Sheva. Considering these are electronic items and price variation is in the range is only about 10%, we hold that there is no justification recorded in the original authority order for rejection and redetermination of assessable value. 5. In view of above disc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
