TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (8) TMI 1002
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ubject Bill of Entry. Aggrieved by reclassification, the appellant preferred an appeal before Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) who vide the impugned order upheld the classification adopted by the lower authority. Hence the appellant is before this Tribunal. 3. Shri Ramamurthy, Ld. Counsel appeared for the appellant and Shri R. Rajaraman, Ld. Authorized Representative appeared for the respondent. 3.1 The Ld. Counsel for the appellant submitted that the impugned order has failed to examine whether the imported goods are used as an accessory for equipment falling under CM 9018. The Laser Imager is principally used in practice with MRI equipment and it is not disputed by the department that the imported equipment is suitable for use solely or principally with MIRI equipment. In the alternative, the imported equipment ought to be classified under CTH 9018 1300 "magnetic resonance imaging apparatus by application of chapter note 2(b) of chapter 90. Chapter Note 2(b) to Chapter 90 provides that other parts and accessories, if suitable for use solely or principally with a particular kind of machine, instrument, or apparatus, or with a number of machines, instruments, or apparatus of the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s being accessories of the said machines they are also classifiable under CTH 9018 9019 only as per Note 2(b) of Chapter 90 of the Customs Tariff 1985. (ii) While it is Revenue's case that the impugned goods cannot be classified using Rule 2 (a) as the Laser Imagers are not specifically included in any of the headings of chapters 84, 85 or 91. Similarly their classification under Rule 2 (b) is ruled out since the impugned goods are equally usable with goods falling under the Heading 9018 and 9022. Being goods that are suitable for use with a host of machines falling under CTH 9018 and 9022 they have to be classified under the heading 9033 as per Note 2 (c) of Chapter 90. C. The appellant has taken an alternate plea that the imported equipment ought to be classified under CTH 9018 1300 as 'Magnetic Resonance Imaging Apparatus', by application of Rule 2(b) of Chapter 90. 7. While deciding the classification of a product by its end use it would be useful to note that in CCE v. Carrier Aircon [(2006) 5 SCC 596], the Apex Court held: "14... There are a number of factors which have to be taken into consideration for determining the classification of a product. For the purposes of cl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in Webster's Third New International Dictionary as follows : "an object or device that is not essential in itself but that adds to the beauty, convenience, or effectiveness of something else". Other meanings given there are : "supplementary or secondary to something of greater or primary important", "additional"; "any of several mechanical devices that assist in operating or controlling the tone resources of an organ" "Accessories" are not necessarily confined to particular machines for which they may serve as aids. The same item may be an accessory of more than one kind of instrument." ( emphasis added ) Hence an accessory of one machine can be an accessory of more than one kind of machine. 10. The appellant, in further refining his argument, has stated that the order in original and the order in appeal have failed to note the different between 'capable for use' and 'suitable for use'. The effect of the impugned order is that it in effect substitutes 'suitability' with a 'meant for test' or 'exclusive purpose test' which is impermissible in law. It is their averment that if an accessory is suitable to be principally used with medical equipment classifiable under CTH 90....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... due to its make, technology used or capabilities etc. while the word "solely" means "only and not involving anyone or anything else", the word "principally" means "primarily" or "of first importance". Hence the 'market test' of the goods shows that it a multi-compatible accessory for a variety of medical digital imaging sources and cannot be said to be suitable for use solely or principally with a particular kind of machine or instrument or apparatus, or with a number of machines, instruments or apparatus of the same heading. In such a situation it would be a travesty to limit its suitability or use only as an accessory to the MRI system or to medical equipment classifiable under CTH 9018 only. Hence while examining the judgement cited by the appellant above, we find that the word 'suitable', does not take forward the appellants case as the impugned accessory is suitable with a wide range of machines falling under different CTHs as mentioned earlier. Classifying a multi-compatible accessory by pairing it with the machine of choice of the importer runs the possibility of the same model of the Laser Imager being classified under different heading each time an importer declares its s....