TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
Parts of LCD panel is to be classified as part of LCD panel and not part of final article
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....arts of LCD panel is to be classified as part of LCD panel and not part of final article<br>By: - Bimal jain<br>Customs - Import - Export - SEZ<br>Dated:- 15-7-2023<br><br>The CESTAT, Bangalore in M/S. XIAOMI TECHNOLOGY INDIA LIMITED VERSUS THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, BANGALORE - 2023 (7) TMI 325 - CESTAT BANGLORE set aside the order of Commissioner (Appeal) and held that the Liquid Crystal Displ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ay ("LCD") Panels are classified under tariff entry 9013 8010 and parts of LCD panels are classified under tariff entry 9013 9010 because LCD panels could be used for purposes other than television sets and parts of LCD panels are parts of LCD panel and not part of article. Facts: M/s. Xiaomi Technology India Ltd. ("the Appellant") is engaged in the business of manufacturing and trading of elect....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ronic products. The Appellant has imported parts of LCD panels for manufacturing television and classified such parts of LCD panels under tariff entry 9013 9010. The Adjudicating Authority vide order in original ("the OIO") classified the parts of LCD panels under tariff entry 8529 9090 by applying Note (2b) of Section XVI which states that goods which are parts and which is solely and principall....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y used in CTH 8528 (Television) are to be classified under CTH 8529. Aggrieved thereby, the Appellant appealed before the Commissioner (Appeal), who vide the Order in Appeal ("the Impugned order") upheld the order passed by the Adjudicating Authority. Aggrieved by the Impugned order the Appellant filed an appeal before the CESTAT, Bangalore. Issue: Whether parts of LCD panels will be classifie....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d as part of television or under heading of LCD panel? Held: The CESTAT, Bangalore M/S. XIAOMI TECHNOLOGY INDIA LIMITED VERSUS THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, BANGALORE - 2023 (7) TMI 325 - CESTAT BANGLORE held as under: * Relied upon the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme court in case of CCE, AURANGABAD VERSUS M/S VIDEOCON INDUSTRIES LTD. THR. ITS DIRECTOR - 2023 (3) TMI 1338 - SUPREME COURT wher....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ein the court while interpreting the general rule of interpretation held that, Note 1 (m) to Section XVI excludes Chapter 90 goods (which includes LCD panels) and more importantly, Note 2 opens with the expression "subject to Note 1". Thus, it is clear that when goods are excluded from a particular section, the "pull in" through a note has to be narrowly construed, as otherwise, the basis of exclu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sion would be defeated and the earlier note (in our case Note 1) rendered redundant. Further, by interpreting Note 2(a) to Chapter 90 the court stated that LCDs, which are goods and are used as parts in the final product mentioned in Chapter 90, are to be classified in its respective heading i.e. as LCD and not under the heading of final product. * Held that, the LCD Panels are to be classified ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....under tariff entry 9013 8010 and parts of LCD panels are to be classified under tariff entry 9013 9010. * Set aside the Impugned order. (Author can be reached at [email protected])<br> Scholarly articles for knowledge sharing by authors, experts, professionals ....