2018 (9) TMI 1602

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... bile phone or its accessory under Notification 21/2002. Appeal dismissed - decided against appellant.
Ms. Sulekha Beevi C.S., Member (Judicial) And Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member (Technical) Shri P.C. Anand, Chartered Accountant for the Appellant Shri K. Veerabhadra Reddy, JC (AR) for the Respondent ORDER Per Bench The appellants had imported AC Pins (which are parts of mobile phone chargers) and claimed classification under Customs Tariff Heading 85177090 claiming the benefit of nil rate of duty under Notification No.21/2005-Cus. and Excise Notification No. 6/2006 and 20/2006. The Department took the view that the impugned goods are not eligible for benefit of the said notifications and the proceedings initiated against the a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 3 (285) ELT 234 (Tri. Bang.) b. State of Punjab Vs. Nokia India Pvt. Ltd. - 2015 9315) ELT 162 (SC) c. Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi Vs. Insulation Electrical (P) Ltd. - 2008 (224) ELT 512 (SC) d. LG Electronics India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CC - 2006 (204) ELT 450 (Tri. Mum.) affirmed by Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 2007 (211) ELT A45 (SC) e. Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Bansal Industrial Corporation - 2000 (118) ELT 119 f. Pushpam Forging Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Raigad - 2006 (193)ELT 334 g. Himachal Futuristic Communications Ltd. Vs. CC - 2005 (183) ELT 92 (Tri. Del.) 3. On the other hand, ld. AR Shri K. Veerabhadra Reddy supports the impugned order. He draws our attention to decision of Twenty First Century B .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... duty leviable thereon under sub-section (1) of section 3 of the said Customs Tariff Act subject to the condition that the importer follows the procedure set out in the Customs (Import of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty for Manufacture of Excisable Goods) Rules, 1996" 5.2 There is no dispute that the mobile charger is an "accessory" of a mobile handset. This very point has been conclusively decided by the Tribunal in Himachal Futuristic Communications Ltd. Vs. CC, New Delhi - 2005 (183) ELT 92 (Tri. Del.) relied by the ld. Consultant for appellant. The Tribunal therein has unequivocally held that chargers, battery and antenna are accessories for mobile handsets and thus eligible for notification No.21/2002-Cus. The dispute then revolves .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X