Mobile parts classifiable under 8517 79 90, exemption u/s XVI Note 2(b) and Notification 57/2017-Cus Sl. No. 6E

The Authority held that the proposed imports, comprising various specially designed and processed components (including metal front case, keys, tapes, brackets, vapor chamber, and related items), are specifically engineered and solely or principally suitable for use in mobile phone manufacturing. Applying Section XVI Note 2(b) and excluding "parts of general use," the goods were classified under Tariff Item 8517 79 90 as "other parts" of telecommunication apparatus. The Authority rejected characterization as generic raw materials, emphasizing tailored specifications and irreversible integration into mobile assemblies. Consequently, the applicant was held eligible for exemption under Sl. No. 6E of Notification No. 57/2017-Cus., subject to fulfillment of prescribed conditions.

---

---

1. ISSUES PRESENTED AND CONSIDERED

1.1 Whether the subject imported inputs, specifically designed for use in mobile phone assemblies such as "Assy Case Front" (front cover), are classifiable as "parts" under Tariff Item 8517 79 90 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975.

1.2 Whether, upon such classification and use, the subject imported inputs are eligible for exemption from customs duty under Serial No. 6E of Notification No. 57/2017-Customs, as amended, subject to compliance with the IGCR Rules.

1.3 Whether the post-import activities undertaken on the imported inputs for manufacture of "Assy Case Front" constitute "manufacture" within the meaning of Rule 3(1)(i) of the Customs (Import of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty or for Specified End Use) Rules, 2022, for the purpose of availing the exemption under Serial No. 6E of Notification No. 57/2017-Customs.

1.4 Whether the Authority could proceed to decide the application ex parte in the absence of comments or appearance from the jurisdictional Commissionerate.

2. ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS

Issue 1 - Classification of imported inputs as "parts" under Tariff Item 8517 79 90

Legal framework

2.1 The Court considered the General Rules for Interpretation of the Tariff, particularly Rule 1, read with the relevant Section and Chapter Notes of Section XVI and Chapter 85, including Note 2(b) to Section XVI and Note 1(g) to Section XVI. The tariff structure of Heading 8517 and subheading 8517 79 90 ("Other" parts) was set out.

2.2 Reliance was placed on judicial precedents interpreting the term "parts", including:

(a) CCE v. Insulation Electrical (India) Pvt. Ltd. - a "part" is an element or component without which the main article is incomplete.

(b) CTO v. Prasoon Enterprises - an item is a "part" if it is essential to the functioning or structure of the finished article.

(c) CESTAT ruling in respect of mobile phone covers/frames in Samsung India Electronics Pvt. Ltd., affirmed by the Supreme Court, holding mobile phone back covers, middle plates and front frames classifiable under 8517 79 90.

(d) Amazon Wholesale India Pvt. Ltd. v. CAAR, New Delhi - classification of a part depends on its suitability for sole or principal use with the machine of the heading, and not on market description or the fact that further processing/assembly remains.

Interpretation and reasoning

2.3 The subject goods (e.g. Metal Front Case Dark Grey, Volume-Key, Power-Key, Tape Waterproof-Sponge-Mic Btm, Key FPCB-Side, Bracket-Key, Vapor Chamber, various conductive and insulating tapes, speaker rubber, NI metal sheet, etc.) are imported in a form specifically cut, treated and dimensioned as per mobile phone manufacturers' specifications, and are intended solely for use in mobile phone assemblies such as "Assy Case Front".

2.4 The Authority noted that:

(a) Each input performs a defined and distinct function within the mobile phone assembly (e.g. keys, vapor chamber, speaker protection, waterproofing, conductive/insulating roles, camera protection, antenna/network function).

(b) The goods are not generic industrial materials but are engineered for integration into mobile phone sub-assemblies and are suitable for use solely/principally with cellular mobile phones.

(c) Subsequent processes (quality inspection, embedding, welding, pressing, cleaning) do not alter their essential character as mobile-phone-specific parts.

2.5 Applying Note 2(b) to Section XVI, the Authority held that parts suitable for use solely or principally with machines of Heading 8517 are to be classified with such machines. The goods in question meet this criterion as they are designed and used exclusively in mobile phone assemblies and are essential to the structure/function of the mobile phone, thus answering the judicial test of a "part".

2.6 Note 1(g) to Section XVI, dealing with "parts of general use", was considered inapplicable, as the subject goods are not standard fasteners or generic hardware but application-specific components tailored for mobile phones.

Conclusions

2.7 The Authority concluded that the subject imported goods are "parts" suitable for use solely or principally with mobile phones and are correctly classifiable under Tariff Item 8517 79 90 as "other" parts of telephone/telecommunication apparatus.

Issue 2 - Eligibility of imported inputs for exemption under Serial No. 6E of Notification No. 57/2017-Customs

Legal framework

2.8 Serial No. 6D of Notification No. 57/2017-Customs, as amended by Notification No. 10/2025-Customs, grants a concessional rate for specified goods "for use in the manufacture of cellular mobile phones", such as battery cover, front cover, middle cover, main lens, back cover, GSM antenna, SIM socket, other mechanical items of plastic/metal, etc., now covering goods "of any chapter".

2.9 Serial No. 6E exempts "inputs or parts for use in the manufacture of goods mentioned at S. No. 6D above" at Nil rate of duty, subject to conditions, including compliance with the Customs (Import of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty) Rules, 2017 / 2022 (IGCR).

Interpretation and reasoning

2.10 The Authority accepted that the final product manufactured by the applicant - "Assy Case Front" or "Front Cover" of a mobile phone - is a "front cover" of cellular mobile phones and falls within the scope of goods specified at Serial No. 6D. It is a key sub-assembly providing structural integrity, mounting, key housing and thermal management, and is used solely in the manufacture of mobile phones such as Samsung Galaxy A566.

2.11 Since the subject imported inputs (metal front case, keys, vapor chamber, FPCB, tapes, brackets, sponges, etc.) are used in the manufacture of this "front cover" and are not used for any other purpose, they qualify, in principle, as "inputs or parts for use in the manufacture of goods mentioned at S. No. 6D", within Serial No. 6E.

2.12 The Authority held that the exemption under Serial No. 6E is available provided:

(a) The classified goods are indeed used exclusively in manufacture of intermediary or finished goods falling under Serial No. 6D (here, front cover/Assy Case Front which itself ultimately goes into smartphones/mobile phones), and

(b) The importer complies with the procedural and substantive conditions under the IGCR Rules, 2017 / 2022, including verification by the field formations at the time of each import.

Conclusions

2.13 The Authority held that, in view of their classification under 8517 79 90 and end-use in the manufacture of front covers (covered by Serial No. 6D), the subject imported inputs are eligible for Nil rate exemption under Serial No. 6E of Notification No. 57/2017-Customs, subject to:

(i) exclusive use in manufacture of intermediary or finished goods used in smartphones/mobile phones, and

(ii) strict compliance with IGCR Rules, 2017 / 2022, and verification by the proper officer for each import.

Issue 3 - Whether post-import operations amount to "manufacture" under IGCR Rules, 2022

Legal framework

2.14 Rule 3(1)(i) of the Customs (Import of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty or for Specified End Use) Rules, 2022 defines "manufacture" as:

"the processing of raw materials or inputs by the importer in any manner that results in emergence of a new product having a distinct nature or character or use or name".

2.15 From this, the Authority distilled three cumulative criteria:

(a) Processing of raw materials/inputs by the importer in any manner.

(b) Emergence of a new product.

(c) The new product must have a distinct nature, character, use, or name.

Interpretation and reasoning

2.16 The applicant's processes on the imported inputs consist of: multi-stage quality inspections and nineteen functional tests; embedding and stationing of inputs on the metal base through jigs, hand or machines; laser welding of metal sheets; mechanical pressing of various components at specified force; and final cleaning before dispatch. These steps are largely irreversible and result in permanent integration of inputs into the "Assy Case Front".

2.17 On this basis, the Authority accepted that:

(a) There is "processing" of inputs in several defined steps, with assembly, welding, pressing and functional testing.

(b) A new product emerges - the "Assy Case Front" / "Front Cover" - which is functionally and visually distinct from the individual inputs (e.g. separate keys, tapes, FPCB, brackets, vapor chamber, etc.).

(c) The resultant product has a distinct commercial name ("Assy Case Front"), distinct character and distinct use as a major sub-assembly and functional framework for mobile phones, different from the independent use or identity of the inputs.

2.18 The Authority's reasoning was in line with the judicially accepted test that manufacture takes place when, after processing, the original commodity can no longer be regarded commercially as the same commodity but as a new and distinct article (principles referred from Ujagar Prints and Pio Food Packers). The assembly-amounts-to-manufacture principle, as enunciated in decisions involving assembling of parts into a finished product, was invoked by analogy.

Conclusions

2.19 The Authority concluded that the applicant's post-import processes on the subject inputs result in manufacture, within the meaning of Rule 3(1)(i) of the IGCR Rules, 2022, of a new product ("Assy Case Front"/"Front Cover") having a distinct nature, character, use and name. This satisfies the manufacturing requirement linked to the benefit under Serial No. 6E of Notification No. 57/2017-Customs, subject to actual compliance with IGCR procedures.

Issue 4 - Ex parte adjudication by the Authority

Legal framework

2.20 The Authority referred to Regulation 19 of the CAAR Regulations, 2021, which permits disposal of an application ex parte on merits if the applicant or the Principal Commissioner/Commissioner does not appear on the scheduled date of hearing, with a proviso for setting aside such order on sufficient cause being shown.

Interpretation and reasoning

2.21 Despite forwarding the complete application and sending multiple reminders and hearing links to the jurisdictional Commissionerate, no comments were received, nor was there any departmental appearance at the personal hearing.

2.22 In view of the statutory time-lines under the Act and Regulations, and the clear enabling provision for ex parte disposal, the Authority found it appropriate and necessary to proceed ex parte and determine the application on the basis of the applicant's submissions and the available record.

Conclusions

2.23 The Authority held that it was justified in proceeding ex parte under Regulation 19 of the CAAR Regulations, 2021, and issued the ruling on the merits of classification and exemption accordingly.

---