Micromax Informatics Limited Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Delhi)
In the case of Micromax Informatics Limited vs Commissioner of Customs before CESTAT Delhi, Micromax appealed against a customs duty order by the Principal Commissioner. The order, dated August 30, 2019, denied Micromax’s claim for exemption on imported LED/LCD TV panels under Serial No. 432 of Notification No. 12/2012-CUS, asserting that the goods were incomplete panels and thus ineligible for the exemption. Customs argued the panels were merely open cells with T-con boards, which did not qualify as complete TV panels under customs classification item (CTI) 8529 90 90. Micromax countered by proposing an alternative classification of the goods under CTI 9013 80 10, arguing that these were liquid crystal display panels, qualifying for nil customs duty. Citing precedents, Micromax’s counsel contended that classification issues are questions of law and thus can be raised at any appellate stage, referring to the Supreme Court ruling in Rama Machinery Corporation vs Collector of Customs. Customs opposed, arguing the reclassification attempt was invalid as it wasn’t raised at the initial assessment stage. However, the CESTAT allowed Micromax’s request, relying on judgments from higher courts which held that an alternative classification plea could be made if substantiated by existing evidence. Consequently, the CESTAT permitted Micromax to include this alternative classification, allowing further examination under CTI 9013 80 10, potentially impacting the customs duty assessment on the imported goods.
