2013 (1) TMI 588 - AT - Customs

'CESTAT affirms 'fire detection system' as security equipment under Customs Notification

COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS. BANGALORE Versus M/s DELL INTERNATIONAL SERVICES INDIA PVT LTD.

The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Bangalore upheld the classification of the imported 'fire detection and quenching system' as a security system under ... Classification - Fire detection and quenching system - Respondents have claimed the same as 'security system' - Notification No.140/91 Cus dt. 22/10/1991 - Granted exemption when imported by a 100% EOU - Held that:- Any security system is designed to protect persons/property from against threat, theft or damage. The imported equipments are very much used for protection of property and humanbeings, inasmuch as they are undisputedly used in detection of fire and extinguishing the fire as and when it breaks out. In favour of assessee Issues:Classification of imported item 'fire detection and quenching system' under Notification No.140/91 Cus dt. 22/10/1991.Analysis:Issue 1: Classification of imported item 'fire detection and quenching system'The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Bangalore pertains to the classification of the imported item 'fire detection and quenching system' under Notification No.140/91 Cus dt. 22/10/1991. The dispute arises from the contention of the Department that the item does not fall under the category of 'security system' as mentioned in Sl. No.10 of the said notification. The respondents have claimed that the item should be considered a 'security system' and thus be covered under the notification for exemption.The Tribunal noted that the Notification No.140/91 Cus grants exemption to various items when imported by a 100% EOU, including general use items like pollution control equipment, quality assurance equipment, and modular furniture, among others. The notification specifically includes 'security systems' in the list of exempted items. The original authority had ruled against treating the 'fire detection and quenching system' as a security system, while the Commissioner (Appeals) held that it falls under this category.The Tribunal agreed with the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) that any security system is intended to protect persons or property from threats, theft, or damage. In this context, the imported equipment, being used for the detection and extinguishing of fires to protect property and individuals, was considered to be within the scope of a security system. Consequently, the Tribunal found no merit in the appeal and rejected it.In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the classification of the imported item 'fire detection and quenching system' as a security system under Notification No.140/91 Cus, thereby affirming the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) and dismissing the Department's appeal.This detailed analysis outlines the issues involved in the legal judgment, the arguments presented by the parties, the interpretation of relevant legal provisions, and the ultimate decision reached by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Bangalore regarding the classification of the imported item 'fire detection and quenching system.'