TMI Blog2014 (12) TMI 836X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch can be sold separately, without selling the cell phone. The High Court failed to appreciate the aforesaid fact and wrongly held that the battery charger is a part of the cell phone. - Decided in favor of Revenue. - Civil Appeal Nos. 11486-11487 of 2014(Arising out of SLP (C) Nos.30398-30399 of 2011) - - - Dated:- 17-12-2014 - S. J. Mukhopadhaya And Madan B. Lokur,JJ. For the Petitioner : Mr Jagjit Singh Chhabra For the Respondent : Mr M P Devanath ORDER Sudhansu Jyoti Mukhopadhaya, J. Leave granted. 2. These appeals have been preferred by the appellants- State of Punjab and others against the impugned orders dated 17th November, 2010 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. By the impugned orders the Division Bench of the High court allowed the appeals preferred by the respondent-assessee, and held that cell phone battery charger is sold as composite package along with cell phone, and hence said charger cannot be excluded from the Entry for concessional rate of tax which applies to cell phones and parts thereof. 3. The factual matrix of the case is as follows: The respondent-M/s. Nokia India Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pondent that for subsequent sale of the battery charger and the battery in the State of Punjab, Tax/VAT at the rate of 12.5% was being deposited. The respondent stated that the battery charger is an accessory to the main product that is mobile phone. 6. The Assessing Authority vide detailed common order dated 2nd March 2009 held that the battery charger being a separate item was liable to be taxed at general rate i.e. 12.5% and not at concessional rate applicable to the cell phones inter alia on the premise that the respondents were selling more than one product which were exigible in different rate of tax in a single pack and had themselves admitted the battery charger as a separate commodity was liable to payment of tax at the rate of 12.5% applicable to the goods in residuary Schedule 'F' to the Act. The Assessing Authority further observed that even according to Entry 60 of Schedule 'B', the product included is only the cellular phone and not accessories thereof. 7. The respondent filed Appeal Nos. 804 and 805/2009-10 under Section 62(1) of the Act before the Deputy Excise Taxation Commissioner(Appeals), Patiala Division, Patiala, inter alia, challenging ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l contentions made on behalf of the parties and perused the record. Schedule 'B' of the Act contains list of goods taxable at the rate of 4%. Cell phone is mentioned in the said schedule and it finds further place at Serial No.6(g) under Entry 60 and is thereby liable to be charged at the rate of 4%. 13. According to the counsel for the respondent, charger is an integral part of the cell phone and the cell phone cannot be operated without the charger and when any person comes for cell phone, he purchases the cell phone and then automatically takes away the charger for which no separate money is charged. However, it is admitted that whenever Company sells chargers separately then 12.5% tax is charged which is applicable to goods in residuary Schedule 'F' of Act. 14. On behalf of the State it was rightly argued that when Entry 60(6)(g) of Schedule 'B' of the Act does not mention accessories for the purpose of taxing the item/product at the rate of 4%, they need to be charged at 12.5% as per Schedule 'F'. It was contended that the battery chargers are not covered under Entry 60(6)(g) and even otherwise there is no mention of the charger in HMS ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iff Act, 1975. The classification of the goods in the Schedule for the purpose of Rule 3(b) in the general rules for interpretation of import tariff reads as follows: 3(b) mixtures, composite goods consisting of different materials or made up of different components, and goods put up in sets for retail sale, which cannot be classified by reference to (a), shall be classified as if they consisted of the material of component which gives them their essential character, insofar as this criterion is applicable. It was contended that composite goods being used consisting of different materials and different components, and goods put up in sets for retail sale, cannot be classified by reference to clause (a). However, such submission cannot be accepted as it cannot be held that charger is an integral part of the mobile phone making it a composite good. Merely, making a composite package of cell phone charger will not make it composite good for the purpose of interpretation of the provisions. The word 'accessory' as defined in the Webster's Comprehensive Dictionary (International) Volume-I is defined as: a person or thing that aids subordinately; an adjunct; appurt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
