2015 (8) TMI 1065 - AT - Customs

Classification of glass beads (cone shape) Appellants claimed classification of glass beads (cone shape) under chapter sub-heading No. 7018 10 20 of Customs Tariff However, authorities classified same under chapter sub-heading No. 7018 10 90 which attracts higher rate of duty Held that - In case of Art Beads Pvt. Ltd. 2013 (9) TMI 463 - CESTAT MUMBAI tribunal concluded that glass chatons without holes can be classified as glass beads only, after taking into account ISI specifications for glass beads In view of said decisions classification claimed by appellant is correct with consequential relief if any to appellant Decided in favour Appellant.

Summary

Issues: Classification of imported goods under Customs Tariff

In the present case, the issue revolved around the classification of glass beads (cone shape) imported from Hong Kong under the Customs Tariff. The appellants claimed classification under chapter sub-heading No. 7018 10 20, while the authorities classified it under chapter sub-heading No. 7018 10 90, attracting a higher rate of duty. The key point of contention was whether the goods should be classified as 'Glass Chatons' or 'Glass Beads' based on the essential component of having a hole or a shape suitable for stringing like in jewelry.

Analysis:

The Tribunal analyzed the submissions and relied on previous decisions to reach a conclusion. The Commissioner had based the classification on the opinion of the Indian Institute of Gemology, which deemed the goods as 'Glass Chatons'. However, the appellants cited the decision of the Bombay High Court and the Tribunal's decision in a previous case to argue that piercing of chatons is not necessary for classification as 'glass beads'. The Tribunal considered the decision in the case of Art Beads Pvt. Ltd. and the specifications for glass beads, along with expert opinions and trade affidavits. Based on these factors and the precedents cited, the Tribunal concluded that glass chatons without holes can indeed be classified as glass beads. Therefore, the classification claimed by the appellant was deemed correct, and the appeals were allowed with consequential relief if any to the appellant.

Overall, the judgment focused on the proper classification of the imported goods under the Customs Tariff, emphasizing the interpretation of terms like 'Glass Chatons' and 'Glass Beads' based on specific characteristics and industry standards. The Tribunal's decision was guided by precedent and expert opinions to ensure a fair and accurate classification of the goods, ultimately providing relief to the appellant based on the established classification criteria.