2004 (8) TMI 177 - AT - Customs

Tribunal classifies Fixed Wireless Terminals, denies exemption, rules on DoT advisory role. No Larger Bench reference needed.

The Tribunal upheld its earlier decision, classifying the Fixed Wireless Terminals under Heading 8525.2019 and denying the exemption under Notification ... Wireless Terminals - Classification of Issues:Classification of imported Fixed Wireless Terminals under Customs Tariff Act and eligibility for exemption under Notification No. 21/2002-Cus.Analysis:The appeals involved the classification of Fixed Wireless Terminals imported by M/s. Tata Teleservices Limited under sub-heading 8525.2017 of the Customs Tariff Act and the availability of exemption under Notification No. 21/2002-Cus. The Senior Advocate argued that the impugned goods should be classified under sub-heading 8525.2019 and be eligible for the benefit of the notification based on opinions from the Department of Telecommunications. He referenced a previous Tribunal decision and a Bombay High Court case to support his arguments. He suggested referring the matter to a Larger Bench for further consideration.In response, the ld. SDR countered the arguments by stating that the Tribunal had already considered all submissions in a previous order and correctly classified the goods under sub-heading 8525.2019. She emphasized that the Department of Telecommunications' role was advisory and not determinative for customs classification. She distinguished the present case from the Bombay Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. case and argued against the need for a reference to a Larger Bench due to the absence of conflicting decisions.Upon considering both sides' submissions, the Tribunal noted that the classification of the impugned goods had been previously decided, classifying them under Heading 8525.2019 and denying the benefit of Notification No. 21/2002. The Tribunal agreed with the SDR's arguments, stating that the Bombay Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. case was not applicable. Since no new arguments were presented, the Tribunal upheld its earlier decision, ruling that the goods were not eligible for the exemption under Serial No. 313 but could benefit from Serial No. 427 of Notification No. 21/2002 as amended by Notification No. 26/2003. Consequently, all five appeals were disposed of accordingly.