TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 1320X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en stated by the revenue in their appeal as to how such classification is erroneous, we are not inclined to take up the issue of classification - appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed as unsubstantiated. - APPEAL No. C/8/2011 - A/88280/2018 - Dated:- 24-10-2018 - Mr. Ajay Sharma, Member (Judicial) And Mr. Sanjiv Srivastava, Member (Technical) Ms. Trupti Chauhan, Assistant Commissioner (AR), for appellant None for respondent ORDER Per: Sanjiv Srivastava The appeal filed by the revenue is directed against the order in appeal No 95/Mumbai III/2010 dated 12.10.2010 of Commissioner of Custom (Appeals) Mumbai Zone II. By the said order Commissioner (Appeal) has held allowed the appeal filed by revenue holding t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ification No 6/2006 dated 1.3.2006 is admissible or not and concluded that the imported goods Jet Flash V.30 etc cannot enjoy the benefit of exemption under Central excise Notification No 6/2006 C Ex dated 1.03.2006 as they are classifiable under CTH 8542. Therefore, the Commissioner (Appeals) went beyond the scope of the appeal. The appeal was that Adjudicating Authority had not appropriately applied the principles in examining the issue whether Central Excise duty exemption was applicable in the present case. It was contended in the appeal memorandum that the imported goods are devices while their one component is flash memory. By itself, flash memory is not a device rather it is component used in the imported device. As a result memory ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d be allowed. 3.3 Since nobody had appeared on behalf of the respondents when the matter was listed for hearing on 5.6.2018, 13.08.2018 and 24.10.2018 (dated when appeal was heard by us) matter has been taken up for consideration and decision. 4.1 The appeal has been filed by the revenue, on the ground that Commissioner (Appeal) has travelled beyond the scope of appeal filed by revenue before him, but to substantiate the same have not filed the appeal filed by them before the Commissioner (Appeal). Appeal of revenue needs to be dismissed on this account as not substantiated. 4.2 In the appeal filed by the revenue not a single ground has been mentioned stating as to why the classification of the goods as held by the Commissioner (Ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nolithic, hybrid multichip. Then it states For the classification of the articles defined in this note, headings .8542 shall take precedence over any other heading in this Schedule, except in the case of heading 85.23, which might cover them by reference to, in particular, their function. 16. It is noted that the imported Jet Flash V.30, etc. have the USB facility. They are thus USB Flash Drive. They are storage devices comprising of, inter alia, flash memory or memories. These latter goods are a type of Electrically Erasable Programmable Read Only Memory (EEPROM) in the form of electronic integrated circuit. Thus, the imported goods are devices while their one component is flash memory. By itself, flash memory is not a device ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
