Judgements

Reliance Engineers Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Customs on 14 May, 2008

Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal – Tamil Nadu
Reliance Engineers Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Customs on 14 May, 2008
Bench: P Chacko, K T P.


ORDER

P.G. Chacko, Member (J)

1. A classification dispute is arising in this case, which relates to an item called “modular plug for telephone”. According to the assessee (appellant), the item was classifiable under SH 8517.90 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act at the material time. According to the Revenue, it was classifiable more appropriately under SH 8536.90 of the said Schedule. The item is covered by a Bill of Entry filed in 1999-2000.

2. The rival Tariff entries are given below:

A. Heading 8517

Heading No.

Sub-heading

No.

Description of Article

Rate of Duty

Standard Preferential

Areas

(1)

(2)

(3)

(3)

(4)

8517

 

Electrical apparatus for line

telephony or line telegraphy,

including line telephone sets

with cordless handsets and

telecommunication apparatus

for carrier-current line

systems or for digital line

systems; videophone.

 

 

8517.90

 

Parts

15%

—-

B. Heading 8536

Heading No.

Sub-heading No.

Description of Article

Rate of Duty

Standard Preferential

Areas

(1)

(2)

(3)

(3)

(4)

85.36

 

Electrical apparatus for

switching or protecting

electrical circuits, or for

making connections to or in

electrical circuits (for

example, switches, relays,

fuses, surage suppressors,

plugs, sockets, lamp-holders,

junction boxes), for a voltage

not exceeding, 1000 volts.

 

 

 

8536.90

Other apparatus

35%

—-

3. Both the lower authorities classified the goods under SH 8536.90 with the result that a refund claim filed by the assessee stood rejected on merits. Hence the present appeal of the assessee.

4. It appears from the impugned order that the lower appellate authority accepted the fact that the goods imported by the appellants were used for connecting the handset with the main set of telephone and hence the same should be classified as an electrical apparatus used in line telephony. However, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) held the item to be more appropriately classifiable under SH 8536.90 as it was found (hat the electrical circuit in the telephone system in which it was used employed a voltage of less than 1000. After hearing both sides and considering their submissions, we are not in a position to accept the latter part of the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals). Once it was found that the modular plug was used for connecting the handset and the main set of telephone and was classifiable as an electrical apparatus used in line telephony, the appellate authority ought not to have travelled out of the ambit of Heading 85.17, where the article was described as “electrical apparatus for line telephony or line telegraphy, including line telephone sets with cordless handsets and telecommunication apparatus…”. Such apparatus, complete, fell under SH 8517.10 and parts thereof fell under SH 8517.90 and the latter was quite befitting the modular plug for telephone. The impugned order is set aside and this appeal is allowed.

(Dictated and pronounced in open court)