Case Law Details
Continental Automative Components (India) Pvt Ltd Vs C.C-The Principal Commissioner Customs Bangalore (CESTAT Bangalore)
we find that the appellant has imported 576 pieces of LCD modules and accordingly filed bill of entry giving the details of the same and the goods were physically examined by the officers of SIIB and the stand of the appellant from the very beginning was that as per the technical write up, which was submitted to the Department, clearly shows that these LCD are used in the instrument cluster manufacture by the appellant and which instrument cluster in turn disclosed the main Kilometer reading, Day Trip reading and Clock and all these details are matched with the details in bill of entry. We also find that the original authority, in spite of technical details given by the appellant, did not seek technical opinion before passing the Order-in-Original and has also failed to explain in its Order as to why the subject goods are different from plain LCDs. We also find that the Order-in-Original was passed without issuing the SCN which is also in violation of principles of natural justice, in view of the decision in the case of Zinc Products Vs UOI, 1992 (57) ELT 222 (mad). We also find that LCDs are specifically provided in Tariff Item No. 9013 and as per Note 2(a) attached to Chapter 90, parts and accessories which are goods included in any of the Heading of the said Chapter 90 are to be classified in their respective Headings.
We also find that this decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court has been followed by the Tribunal in number of decisions cited supra by the appellant wherein similar products have been held to be classifiable under Tariff Item 9013. By following the ratio of the Hon’ble Apex Court decision in the case of Secure Meters (cited supra) relied upon by the appellant and also considered by the Tribunal in various decisions, we are of the considered opinion that the impugned order classifying the said goods under 90299000 is not legally sustainable and we set aside the same by allowing the appeal of the appellant with consequential relief, if any.
FULL TEXT OF THE CESTAT BANGALORE ORDER
The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 30.07.2010 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Bangalore whereby the Commissioner (Appeals) has rejected the appeal of the appellant and upheld the Order of the original authority.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
