2008 (10) TMI 217

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....appellants for purchase of Desk Top Computers. The appellants claimed benefit of Notification No. 6/2006, dated 1-3-2006 at the time of import which provides as under:- S. No. Chapter or heading or sub-heading or Tariff item of the First Schedule Description of excisable goods Rate 16 8471 "Computers 12% Explanation. - For the purposes of this exemption, "computer" shall include central processing unit (CPU) cleared separately; or CPU with monitor, mouse and key board, cleared together as a set; but shall not include input or output devices or accessories such as monitor key board, mouse, modem, uninterrupted power supply system, or web camera cleared separately" Benefit of notification was allowed in respect o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....orted in 1985 (21) E.L.T. 72 (Bom.) to submit that the goods to be assessed as presented at the time of import. 6. We find that in the present case the appellants filed a Bill of Entry in respect of CPU, monitor, Key-board & mouse. It is not the case of the Revenue that separate Bills of Entry are filed in respect of monitor. The case law relied upon by the Revenue are not applicable on the facts of the present case. In the case of Sony India Ltd. components were imported into India under 94 different consignments over a period of 2 years. In this situation the Tribunal held that these are not to be assessed as complete T.V. sets. In other decision in the case of Glaxo Laboratories (India) Ltd. (supra) the Hon'ble Bombay High Court held ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....at they are classified under 85.28 and the benefit of the exemption is available only to items classified under CH 84.71. They have also stated that the appellants had not claimed such benefits at the time of import. Another reason is that they themselves in their bill of entry indicated these items separately with separate classification. We have also gone through the impugned order of the Commissioner. On going through Para 11 and 12 of the impugned order, we find that he has not drawn the conclusions properly. For example, the last sentence of Para 11 reads as follows "In other words, even though the monitors are classified under 85.28, the fact remains that they are cleared along with other items as a set and therefore, the benefit cann....