Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

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

2026 (7) TMI 1562

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....contain Display Assembly of 75 inch, 264 units, the parts of interactive flat panel. However, the goods were seized under the notion that the right classification for the goods is CTH 8528. The goods were, however provisionally released.   1.2 The alleged wrong classification had resulted into nonpayment of the customs duty that the Show Cause Notice No. 573/2024-25 dated 18.02.2025 was served upon the appellants proposing the reclassification of the goods under CTH 85285900 for the aforesaid Bill of Entry dated 23.10.2024. Differential duty of Rs.32,10,922/- was proposed to be recovered from the appellants. The imported goods were proposed to be confiscated. The bank guarantee of Rs.4,17,199/- which was furnished for provisional release was proposed to be appropriated towards payment of redemption fine. In addition, the penalty under Section 112(a)(ii) of the Customs Act, 1962 was also proposed to be imposed. The show cause notice also demanded the differential customs duty amounting to Rs.12,96,49,240/- with respect to past imports (58 Bils of Entry) along with the proposal for the penalty under 112A(ii). The said proposal has fully been confirmed vide the order under cha....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... (iii) Cloudwalker Streaming Technologies Pvt Ltd Vs. CC (NS-V), Raigad reported as 2022 (1) TMI 1078 - CESTAT MUMBAI, affirmed by Hon'ble Supreme Court vide Order dated 23.02.2026 in Civil Appeal Diary No. 1401/2026. (iv) Final Order No. 86397/2025 dated 01.10.2025 of CESTAT Mumbai in the case of Brio Interactive Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CC (NS-V) (v) Hitevision Tech India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CC, Chennai, reported as 2026 (1) TMI 1240 - CESTAT CHENNAI 3.3 Learned counsel finallyr submitted that the show cause notice in the present case was issued in violation of the monetary provisions of Section 28(1)(A) of the Customs Act, 1962 for want of pre notice consultation. The confirmation of proposal of such show cause notice is liable to be set aside. With these submissions, the order under challenge is prayed to be set aside and the appeal is prayed to be allowed.   4. Learned Departmental Representative, while rebutting these submissions has reiterated findings arrived at by the adjudicating authority below in the impugned order. The observations in Para 7.1.2 and 7.2.3 of the order are impressed upon. The reliance of the adjudicating authority on the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... We have also perused the HSN Explanatory Notes to CTH 85.28 which reads as follows: (A) Monitors capable of directly connecting to and designed to use with an Automatic Data Processing Machine of Heading 84.71 This group includes monitors which are capable of accepting a signal from the central processing unit of an automatic data processing machine and provide a graphical presentation of the data processed. These monitors are distinguishable from other types of monitors and from television receivers. The monitors of this group may be characterized by the following features: (i) They usually display signals of graphics adaptors (monochrome or colour) which are integrated in the central processing unit of the automatic data processing machine; (ii) They do not incorporate a channel selector or video tuner; (iii) They are fitted will connectors characteristic of data processing systems (e.g., RS-232C interface, DIN, D-SUB, VGA, DVI, HDMI or DEP (display port) connectors); (iv) The viewable image size of these monitors does not generally exceed 76 cm (30 inches); (v) They have a display pitch size (usually s....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....i) performing arithmetical computations specified by the user; and (iv) executing, without human intervention, a processing program which requires them to modify their execution, by logical decision during the processing run.   7. It is also abundantly clear from the description of the Interactive Flat Panel display, the goods in question in the catalogue on record that these do contain a central processing unit and does operate on software that requires an input device which, though not be different from that for computes and other automatic data processing machines, functions on its own as different from monitors of CTH 8528. Therefore, the goods in question cannot be said to be merely projectors or monitor. As already held above that all the four essential conditions contained in Note 5(A) to Chapter Note 84 are satisfied, the goods in question qualify to be called as Automatic Data Processing Machine (ADPM) Classifiable under CTH 8471.   8. The goods of Chapter 85 and from the HSN Explanatory Notes to CTH 8528, it is more than apparent that CTH 8528 would cover monitors which are capable of receiving and displaying the signals when attached to any of th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....2GHz Processor), a 2GB RAM and Android 7.0 Operating software. In addition, they also have an internal storage capacity of 16GB. Thus, goods are machines which are capable of storing data or programmes for the execution of programmes and satisfy condition no. (1) of Chapter Note 5(A) to Chapter 84. The goods are capable of working as an ADPM on a standalone basis and can also be used in conjunction with other ADPM, but this would not mean that the goods would cease to be ADMP in their own right, capable of working on a standalone basis. The large size display (65 inches and 75 inches) is only a feature/specification of the product and this cannot be construed to be its function, much less its principal function. The Deputy Commissioner and the Commissioner (Appeals), therefore, committed an error in holding that the large size of display would mean that the goods are meant for display purpose to a large gathering and, therefore, in terms of Note 5(E) of Chapter Note 84, the goods would merit classification as per the specific use - Commissioner (Appeals) committed an error in rejecting the contention of the appellant that the goods were ADPM by taking recourse to trade par....