2001 (1) TMI 503 - AT - Customs

Appellant wins dispute over video cassette classification

The judgment favored the appellant, M/s. Shree Salasar Impex, Kolkata, in the dispute over the classification of '1/2' Panasonic NV-E 180 HDA-VHS Blank ... Export & Import Policy - Departmental clarifications Issues:Correct classification of '1/2' Panasonic NV-E 180 HDA-VHS Blank Video Cassette of Japanese origin under Exim Code No. 852390 03.20 or 852390 03.90.Analysis:The dispute in the appeal revolves around the correct classification of the imported '1/2' Panasonic NV-E 180 HDA-VHS Blank Video Cassettes. The appellant, M/s. Shree Salasar Impex, Kolkata, claimed the classification under Exim Code No. 852390 03.20, while the Revenue classified it under Exim Code No. 852390 03.90, requiring a specific import license. The Revenue confiscated the goods and imposed fines for alleged ITC violation and non-submission of the required import license.The appellant argued that the cassettes are suitable for working with S-VHS Video and should be classified under Exim Code No. 852390 03.20. They relied on literature and clarifications from the Directorate General of Foreign Trade (DGFT) supporting their claim. The appellant contended that the word 'suitable' in the Exim Policy should be interpreted broadly to include any cassettes that can work on S-VHS Video, regardless of superior picture quality or sound fidelity.On the other hand, the Revenue maintained that the cassettes were designed for VHS type VCRs and not exclusively for S-VHS, emphasizing the differences in picture quality and magnetic power between VHS and S-VHS cassettes. They mentioned an ongoing appeal against a similar decision and highlighted the Customs Department's role in matters concerning revenue.The judgment sided with the appellant, emphasizing that the cassettes' capability to work on S-VHS type VCRs qualifies them for classification under Exim Code No. 852390 03.20. The judge rejected the Revenue's interpretation and relied on the DGFT's clarifications, citing the Exim Policy's provision that DGFT's decisions on interpretation are final and binding. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief to the appellants.