Just a moment...

Report
FeedbackReport
Bars
Logo TaxTMI
>
×

By creating an account you can:

Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2025 (1) TMI 269

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ief facts of the case are that M/s Havells India Ltd. [the Respondent] had imported 'MCPCB 6349 Prideplus New 20W 5.8X1127 MM (CELZLX0760) Unmounted printed Circuit Board for the manufacturing of LED Lamps' vide Bill of Entry No. 3068449 dated 02.05.2019 by classifying the said goods under CTH 85340000. The declared assessable value of the goods was Rs. 31,09,067/-. Acting upon specific intelligence that the appellant mis-declared the goods imported under Bill of Entry No. 3068449 dated 02.05.2019 (declared item was MCPCB 6349 Pride plus New 20W 5.8X1127MM (CELZLX0760) (un-mounted Printed Circuit Board) for the manufacturing of LED lamps), the officers of Customs Preventive, New Delhi examined the goods on 13.05.2019 under Panchnama. On Exa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ill of Entry No. 3068449 dated 02.05.2019 were to be classified under CTH 94054090 and thus passed the following order:- (a) Ordered confiscation of seized goods under Section 111 (m) and gave option to redeem the goods on payment of fine of Rs. 2,00,000 under Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962; (b) Confirmed the demand of differential duty amounting to Rs. 6,83,995/ under Section 28 (4) of the Customs Act, 1962 along with interest under Section 28AA of the Act ibid; & (c) Imposed penalty of Rs. 6,83,995/- under Section 114A of the Customs Act, 1962. 2.1 Being aggrieved by the above Order in Original dated 18.10.2019, the respondent filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) wherein the Commissioner has held that the goods i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....under CTH 8534, treating it as a standard Printed Circuit Board (PCB). The uses of PCBs and MCPCBs differ significantly, with PCBs used in various electronic products and MCPCBs primarily in LED lights due to their heat dissipation properties. The notification issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) clearly distinguish MCPCBs from PCBs, supporting different classifications and tax rates. Ld. AR submitted that the differences between PCBs and MCPCBs are as under:- "PCBs classified under CTH 8534 are circuits printed on an insulating material, whereas MCPCBs have a metal base (aluminum or copper) with a dielectric layer in between. Chapter Note 6 of Chapter 85 specifies that "printed circuits" are those formed on an....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, including the Section and Chapter Notes and the General Explanatory Notes of the First Schedule shall be applied for the interpretation and classification of goods. The relevant HSN Notes is as follows:- "Lamps and lighting fittings of this group can be constituted of any material (excluding those materials described in Note I to Chapter 71) and use any source of light [candles, oil, petrol, paraffin (or kerosene), gas, acetylene, electricity, etc.]. Electrical lamps and lighting fittings of this heading may be equipped with lamp-holders, switches, flex and plugs, transformers, etc., or, as in the case of fluorescent strip fixtures, a starter or a ballast." This heading covers in p....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....TH 9405. In the instant case, the product is a LED lamp fixture with LED light integrated into it which can function independently as garden lights. Therefore, they are classifiable under CTH 9405 40 90 as 'others electric lamps and light fitting'. 3.3 Learned Authorized Representative further submitted that it is a settled legal principle, as underscored by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise vs. System Component Pvt. Ltd., wherein it was held that what is admitted need not be proven. This principle finds relevance in the present appeal, where the importer's admission regarding the classification based on the nature and technicalities of the impugned goods aligns with the aforementioned ....