9911796707
Case Laws
Acts
Notifications
Circulars
Classification
Forms
Manuals
Articles
News
D. Forum
Highlights
Notes
🚨 Important Update for Our Users
We are transitioning to our new and improved portal - www.taxtmi.com - for a better experience.
Follow us:
|
Home
Issues: Classification of imported goods under Heading 8525.20 or 85.28, applicability of exemption under Notification 49/2000, cancellation of Export Promotion Capital Goods Scheme license.
Summary: The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, Mumbai involved the classification of imported goods described as satellite receivers under Heading 8525.20 by the appellant, seeking exemption under Notification 49/2000. The license under the Export Promotion Capital Goods Scheme issued to the appellant was canceled, leading to a dispute with the Custom House classifying the goods under Heading 85.28. The appellant contended that the goods should be classified under Heading 8525.20, which was rejected by the Deputy Commissioner and upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals), leading to the appeal. Heading 85.25 covers transmission apparatus for radio-telephony, radio-telegraphy, radio-broadcasting, or television, while Heading 85.28 pertains to reception apparatus for television. The goods in question, "Business Satellite Receiver Model D9234," were designed for the business TV market to receive and transmit broadcast signals over a cable television network. The Commissioner (Appeals) classified the goods under Heading 85.28 as reception apparatus for color television, emphasizing their primary function of receiving signals. The appellant argued that both receiving and transmitting functions of the goods were essential, thus justifying classification under Heading 8525.20. The departmental representative contended that since transmission was by line, the goods should be classified under Heading 85.28. However, the Tribunal found that the goods were correctly classified under Heading 85.25, as they were capable of both receiving and transmitting signals, similar to other items in the same heading that transmit and receive wireless signals. The Tribunal disagreed with the emphasis on the principal function of receiving signals, stating that the goods were designed to perform both functions effectively. Therefore, the goods were deemed to be transmission incorporating reception apparatus, leading to the appeal being allowed, the impugned order set aside, and consequential relief granted. Judgment: Appeal allowed, impugned order set aside, and consequential relief granted.
|
