Case Law Details
In re Audio Distribution House Pvt. Ltd (CAAR MUMBAI)
The projector under consideration has got certain additional ports such as HDMI, S-Video, audio-video, which make it capable of being a video projector and consequently classifiable under CTH 85286900 also. GI Rule 3 states that “the heading which provides the most specific description shall be preferred to headings providing a more general description”. The website, https://www.optomausa.com/, of the manufacturer of the impugned device was referred to understand how the projector is marketed by the manufacturer. It is listed under the business category of projectors on the said website. The product description present on the website is reproduced here: “The product projects bright vibrant presentations effortlessly any time of day. Designed for meeting rooms and classrooms, the X400L Ve boasts amazing colour, long lamp life and energy-saving features to provide you with a low overall cost of ownership. This projector is easy to connect, offering robust input options, including HDMI, VGA and composite enable connectivity to a wide range of devices. An integrated 10-watt speaker delivers crisp, room-filling audio that enhances presentations and videos without additional equipment. The portable and lightweight projector can be installed or taken on the go for off-site meetings”. From the above description, it is clear that these are marketed as data projectors only. From the product catalogue and information available on the website, it is clear that data projectors are principally meant for use with an automatic data processing system. They are designed to project in places like conference rooms, business meetings, financial institutions etc. with connectors matching that of a laptop/ computer. They possess both indoor and outdoor projection capability. The projector imported by the appellant has got additional features such as an S-Video port, HDMI port etc. The additional ports give additional utility in the form of an audio-video display. The differentiating features of data projectors compared to that of video projectors are discussed in table I, which substantiates that the principal use of impugned goods, based on functions and features, is with automatic data processing machines. The presence of additional features cannot dis-entitle the impugned goods from classification under sub-heading 85286200. Reliance is placed upon Vardhaman Technology P. Ltd. the Tribunal where it was held that the projectors merely having additional function cannot be denied classification under CTH 85286100 (erstwhile tariff heading for projectors capable of directly connecting to and designed for use with an automatic data processing system of heading 8471). Therefore, the goods under consideration are classifiable under sub-heading 85286200.
6. No. 17 of Notification No. 24/2005-Customs, dated 01.03.2005, as amended, exempts all goods under heading 852862. As the impugned goods are held as classifiable under sub-heading 85286200, they are entitled to the exemption.
7. In view of the foregoing discussions, I rule that the Optoma X400LVe projectors are classifiable under sub-heading 85286200 of the first schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 and would be eligible to avail benefit of Sr. No. 17 of Notification No. 24/2005-Customs, dated 01.03.2005, as amended.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF CUSTOMS AUTHORITY OF ADVANCE RULING, MUMBAI
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
