2017 (5) TMI 1067 - AT - Customs

Tribunal Upholds Classification of Imported Goods as Computer Accessories

The Tribunal upheld the classification of imported goods as parts and accessories of a computer system under Chapter heading 8473. The appeals by the ... Classification of imported goods - accessories for computer system (PC cabinet with built in audio, key board, mouse pad, external port, USB Camera) - whether classified under CETH 8473 30 99 as claimed by assessee or CETH 8529 10 29 as claimed by Revenue? - Held that: - The PC, in conjunction with an optical reader projector lights on the interactive whiteboard through a medium of projector. The teaching aid comprise of PC, projector as well as interactive electronic whiteboard. The impugned goods are parts which can be used into PC by addition of suitable parts such as processor, HDD, RAM etc - impugned goods are parts/ accessories of PC, therefore, the classification of the goods will be under Chapter heading 8473. They do not become part of the Interactive Electronics Whiteboard even if the computer itself is used to project on to the whiteboard. Appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. Issues: Classification of imported goods under Customs Tariff Act, 1975Analysis:1. Background: The appeals were filed by the Revenue against the orders passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) of Customs, New Delhi regarding the classification of certain imported goods declared as accessories for a computer system.2. Dispute: The dispute revolved around the classification of the imported goods, which were initially classified by the Original Adjudicating Authority under CETH 8529 10 29 but later classified by the Commissioner (Appeals) under CETH 8473 30 99 as proposed by the respondent.3. Arguments: The Revenue contended that the goods should be classified under 8529 10 29 as part of an interactive electronic whiteboard, while the respondent argued that the goods were accessories of a computer system and should be classified under CETH 8473.4. Judicial Analysis: The Tribunal examined the nature of the imported goods, which included a PC cabinet with various components like a keyboard, mouse pad, and USB camera. It was noted that when these components were added to the system, it could function as a personal computer or a wall-mounted PC used for teaching aids.5. Classification: The Adjudicating Authority classified the goods as part of an interactive electronic whiteboard under CETH 8529 10 29, while the Commissioner (Appeals) classified them as accessories of a computer system under CETH 8473. The Tribunal reviewed the description of the interactive whiteboard and concluded that the imported goods were parts and accessories of a PC, not solely or principally part of the interactive whiteboard.6. Decision: After considering the arguments and evidence presented, the Tribunal upheld the classification of the imported goods as parts and accessories of a computer system under Chapter heading 8473. The appeals filed by the Revenue were rejected, and the impugned order was upheld.This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the key issues involved in the classification of imported goods under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, providing a comprehensive understanding of the dispute and the Tribunal's decision based on the arguments presented by the parties involved.