TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>CESTAT New Delhi Grants Exemption for Wireless Microphones Under Notification No. 21/2002-Cus, Aligning with Chapter 85 Interpretation.</h1> <h3>Sennheiser Electronics India Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commr. of Cus., New Delhi</h3> The CESTAT New Delhi set aside the order of the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), allowing the appellant's claim for exemption under Notification No. ... Classification of imported goods - Wireless Micro Phone - to be classified under Chapter sub-heading 8525 50 50 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 or not - benefit of N/N. 21/2002-Cus., dated 1-3-2002 (Serial No. 244, Item No. 26, Item Serial No. 9) - HELD THAT:- It is found that micro phones are classified under both Chapter Heading 8518 as well as 8525 of the [Customs] Tariff Act, 1975. Since, the exemption Notification dated 1-3-2002 exempts 'Micro Phones' and there is no specific mention on the category to which the exemption should be extended, the imported goods in this case i.e. 'wireless micro phones' should get the benefit of Notification dated 1-3-2002 for the purpose of Customs duty exemption. There are no merits in the impugned order - appeal allowed. The judgment from the CESTAT New Delhi involves an appeal against an order by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), New Delhi, concerning the classification and exemption of imported wireless microphones under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The appellant claimed the benefit of Notification No. 21/2002-Cus., which exempts 'Micro Phones' under Chapter 85. The key legal issue was whether this exemption applied to wireless microphones, classified under sub-heading 8525 50 50, as opposed to traditional microphones under heading 8518 10 00.The appellant argued that since both classifications fall under Chapter 85, the exemption should apply to wireless microphones. The respondent maintained that the exemption specifically applied to traditional microphones, not wireless ones.The Tribunal found that the exemption notification dated 1-3-2002 did not specify a particular category of microphones, thus supporting the appellant's interpretation. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeal and granting the exemption to the wireless microphones.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
