1998 (11) TMI 201 - AT - Customs

Tribunal Upholds Classification of Computer Accessories, Rejects Revenue Appeal

The Tribunal upheld the classification of Sound Blaster Cards, Video Blaster Cards, and T.V. Coder under sub-heading 8473.30, rejecting the Revenue's ... Classification Issues: Classification of Sound Blaster Cards, Video Blaster Cards, and T.V. CoderClassification under Sub-heading 8473.30 vs. Sub-headings 8519.99 and 8521.90:The appeal raised the issue of whether Sound Blaster Cards, Video Blaster Cards, and T.V. Coder should be classified under sub-heading 8473.30 as per the Commissioner (Appeals) or under sub-headings 8519.99 and 8521.90 as classified by the adjudicating authority in the Order-in-Original. The appellant argued that the imported goods are complete units requiring connection to co-devices like computers to send digital signals, thus should be classified based on their function. On the other hand, the respondents contended that the imported equipments cannot function without being incorporated into the computer, and the classification was decided to fall under sub-heading 8473.30 after a conference and direction from the Commissioner of Customs.Analysis:The Tribunal analyzed the submissions from both parties and considered the relevant tariff headings. Sub-heading 8473.30 pertains to parts and accessories of automatic data processing machines, while Heading 85.19 covers sound reproducing apparatus and Heading 85.21 covers video recording or reproducing apparatus. The Commissioner (Appeals) found merit in the importer's argument that the goods imported could function only as accessories to the computer. It was noted that sound cards lacked a sound head and video cards did not fall under Heading 85.21, which covers items reproducing sound and images on TV only. The TV coder was identified as a mounted PCB different from video recording or reproducing apparatus. Importantly, the Department itself subsequently classified the imported items under Heading 8473.30. As the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) were not rebutted by the Revenue and considering the Department's reclassification, the Tribunal found no grounds to interfere with the impugned order, leading to the rejection of the Revenue's appeal.This detailed analysis highlights the key arguments presented by both parties, the interpretation of relevant tariff headings, and the rationale behind the Tribunal's decision to uphold the classification under sub-heading 8473.30.