2016 (11) TMI 264 - AT - Customs

Tribunal reclassifies textile industry equipment under Customs Tariff Act

The Tribunal allowed the appeal, directing the classification of goods imported by M/s Mahavir Spinning Mills Ltd under heading 9032.89 of the Customs ... Classification of imported goods - Datacolour Autolab 32, Laboratory Dispenser and Solution Maker - classified under heading 8479.89 of the First Schedule or under 9032.89 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 - equipment imported is used for callibrated mixing and dispensing of coloured dyes - Held that: - The item under import is a laboratory dispenser and solution maker with single 12 position turntable to enable the dispensing a combination of colours as a solution. It is intended to achieve fast, accurate and repeatable dispensing of recipes and the preparation of solutions with great precision. Therefore, it would appear to be an instrument. The evolving production techniques in the textile industry require precisely measured combination of dyes and colours and hence the equipment performs the function of measuring. Likewise, it is a pre-mixed quantity of solution which is to be dispensed, and, therefore the equipment performs a controlling function. Further, without any human intervention the dispenser starts operates and stops at pre-set intervals. Hence, the classification claimed under 9032.89 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 as ‘automatic regulating or controlling instruments and apparatus’ is also a distinct possibility. In terms of rule 3(c) of the General Rules for Interpretation of the Import Tariff, the impugned goods be classified under 9032.89 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. Issues: Classification of imported goods under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975Comprehensive Analysis:1. Issue: Classification of GoodsThe appeal was filed against an order upholding the classification of goods imported by M/s Mahavir Spinning Mills Ltd under heading 8479.89 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The appellant imported 'Datacolour Autolab 32, Laboratory Dispenser and Solution Maker' and claimed classification under 9032.89. The assessing officer reclassified the goods, leading to an appeal challenging the confirmation of classification by the first appellate authority.2. Issue: Interpretation of ClassificationThe appellant argued that the imported equipment is used for calibrated mixing and dispensing of colored dyes according to a pre-set proportion. The assessing officer classified the goods under a sub-heading of 'Machines and Mechanical Appliances' within heading '84.79 Machines and Mechanical Appliances Having Individual Functions'. The first appellate authority confirmed this classification, stating that the equipment, capable of different functions, did not fit the alternate classification sought by the appellant.3. Issue: Legal Precedent and Relevant DecisionsThe Authorized Representative relied on a Tribunal decision upheld by the Supreme Court, emphasizing classification based on the principal function of the equipment. The Tribunal noted that the residuary category under heading 84.79 of the Customs Tariff Act is intended for machines with specific but unidentified functions, excluding measuring instruments under Chapter 90. The impugned equipment, a laboratory dispenser and solution maker, was deemed to perform functions of measuring and controlling, justifying classification under 9032.89.4. Judgment and ConclusionConsidering the functions performed by the imported equipment and the exclusion of measuring instruments from the residuary category, the Tribunal directed the classification of the goods under 9032.89 of the Customs Tariff Act. The appeal was allowed based on Rule 3(c) of the General Rules for Interpretation of the Import Tariff. The judgment emphasized the specific functions of the equipment and its role in precise dispensing and controlling processes in the textile industry.This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the classification issues, interpretation of relevant legal provisions, reliance on precedents, and the final decision of the Tribunal regarding the classification of the imported goods under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975.