Tribunal rules against appellant in customs classification dispute under CTH 85049090.

The Tribunal upheld the Department's classification of the imported goods under CTH 85049090, denying the benefit of Notification No. 21/2005-Cus and Notification No. 6/2006-CE. The appellant's appeal was dismissed, and the impugned order was affirmed. The goods were not considered parts or accessories of Integrated Fixed Wireless Telephones (IFWT) and were deemed parts of Switch Mode Power System (SMPS), thus not eligible for the claimed exemptions.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Classification of imported goods.
2. Eligibility for exemption under Notification No. 21/2005-Cus and Notification No. 6/2006-CE.
3. Whether the imported goods are parts or accessories of Integrated Fixed Wireless Telephones (IFWT).

Summary:

1. Classification of Imported Goods:
The appellant, M/s. ACD Communications Pvt. Ltd., imported goods described as "12V SMPS consisting of Main PCB, lightening protector, DC/AC cables, fuse/fuse holders and others" and classified them under CTH 85299090, claiming exemption under Notification No. 21/2005-Cus. and Notification No. 6/2006-CE. The Department reclassified the goods under CTH 85049090, arguing that they are parts of Switch Mode Power System (SMPS) and not directly parts of IFWT.

2. Eligibility for Exemption under Notification No. 21/2005-Cus and Notification No. 6/2006-CE:
The appellant claimed that the imported goods are parts of IFWT and thus eligible for exemption. The Department contended that the goods are parts of SMPS and not directly parts of IFWT, thereby denying the exemption. The Tribunal examined the nature and function of the 12V SMPS and concluded that SMPS is not an integral part of IFWT. Therefore, the imported goods cannot be considered parts of IFWT and are not eligible for the exemption.

3. Whether the Imported Goods are Parts or Accessories of IFWT:
The appellant argued that even if the goods are not parts of IFWT, they should be considered accessories, enhancing the effectiveness of IFWT by providing regulated power supply. The Tribunal referred to various definitions and judicial precedents, including the Hon'ble Supreme Court's decision in State of Punjab v. Nokia India, which held that a mobile phone charger is an accessory. However, the Tribunal concluded that the imported goods, being parts of SMPS, cannot be considered accessories of IFWT. The benefit of the notification is available only to parts, components, or accessories of cellular phones, not to parts of an accessory of a cellular phone.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal upheld the Department's classification of the imported goods under CTH 85049090 and denied the benefit of Notification No. 21/2005-Cus and Notification No. 6/2006-CE. The appellant's appeal was dismissed, and the impugned order was affirmed.

---