2026 (1) TMI 1528

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....no orders under Section 17(5) of the Customs Act, 1962. 4. Being aggrieved by the said assessment done by the ld. adjudicating authority, the Respondent filed appeals before the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals). The Ld. Commissioner (Appeals), after examining the issue, vide the impugned orders, set aside the orders of assessment; the value declared by the Respondent was accepted and the goods in question have been classified as 'Motor Controller' under CTH 8503 0090. 5. Aggrieved from the said orders, the Revenue is before us. 6. The Ld. Authorized Representative appearing on behalf of the Revenue submitted that the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has failed to appreciate that Rule 12(2)(iii) of the Custom Valuation Rules, 2007 which provides that "the proper officer shall have the powers to raise doubts on the truth or accuracy of the declared value based on certain reasons which may include - (a) the significantly higher value at which identical or similar goods imported at or about the same time in comparable quantities in a comparable commercial transaction were assessed;" and has erred in interpreting Rule 12 of Customs Valuation Rules, 2007. 7. He submits that taking into a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....be regarded as part of 'motor' and cannot be classified under Customs Tariff Heading 8503. 9. On the other hand, the Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent supported the impugned orders. He relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of Commissioner of Central Excise, Aurangabad v. Videocon Industries Ltd. [2023 (384) E.L.T. 628 (S.C.)] and Hero Electric Vehicles Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Cus., Ludhiana [2018 (364) E.L.T. 1090 (Tri. - Chan.)] 10. The Ld. AR also relied on the case of YC Electric Vehicle Final Order No. 50298/2025 dated 10/2/2025. 11. Heard the parties. Perused the appeal papers and documents placed before us. 12. We find that in respect of both the issues, with regard to valuation as well as classification, the Tribunal in the appellant's own case, has considered and passed the following Final Order No. 76829-76831/2024 dated 29.08.2024 wherein, this Tribunal holding as under:- 11. We observe that the assessing officer has rejected the transaction values without any valid basis/reasons and without following the due procedure as laid down under Section 14 and Valuation Rules, especially when there is nothing on re....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....roup of devices that receives an input signal from a measured process variable, compares this value with that of a predetermined control point value (setpoint), and determines the appropriate amount of output signal required by the final control element to provide corrective action within a control loop. An electric/electronic controller uses electric signals and digital algorithms to perform its receptive, comparative and corrective functions." 12.2. As per the definition of 'Controller' reproduced above, we observe that the controller has multiple usages and it is nowhere discussed in the assessment order or declaration given by the Respondent that the said motor will be employed in e-rickshaw. There is no logical reasoning provided in the assessment order that the motor has sole function of operation in e-rickshaw and cannot be operated in other mechanical equipment. The lower authority in its assessment order gave various pictorial references regarding the usage of controller with the e-rickshaw but nowhere discusses the usage of the same with the motor as declared by the Respondent. 12.3. We find that the adjudicating authority has considered that the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nd Explanatory Notes to HSN/CTH 8708, the goods imported will have the essential characteristic of parts & accessories of e-rickshaw only when the same are solely or principally used in the said vehicle We also find that the goods as imported by the Respondent did not fulfil the description as provided in explanatory notes to CTH 8708. Further, the electronic controllers are excluded from the parts covered under CTH 8708. Moreover, the lower authority in its findings has not adduced any evidence that the goods imported by the respondent are the parts and accessories of e-rickshaw. We also observe that there is no declaration by the respondent that the said goods will be solely/principally employed in the manufacturing/making of the electric tricycle. As per the terminology of CTH 8708, the goods covered should be the parts and accessories of motor vehicles under CTH 8701 to 8705 and as per the point 3 of the Notes to Chapter XVII, the said goods having the description in two or more of the headings of those chapters is to be classified under that heading which corresponds to the principle use of that part of accessory. As per the reading of point 3 of Notes to Section XVII and the ....