EV Communication Device Classifiable as Data Transmission Equipment Due to Core Functionality

In re Solterra Technologies Pvt Ltd (CAAR Delhi)

The applicant sought an advance ruling before the Customs Authority for Advance Rulings (CAAR), New Delhi, regarding the classification of Electric Vehicle Communication Controllers (EVCC) and the applicability of customs duty exemption under specified notifications for imports originating from the Republic of Korea.

The applicant is engaged in manufacturing electric chargers and importing components including EVCC and SECC. The EVCC is a communication device installed in electric vehicles that enables interaction with charging stations by receiving, converting, and transmitting signals in accordance with prescribed standards. It facilitates safe and efficient charging by acting as a communication interface between the vehicle and charging infrastructure.

The applicant sought clarity on whether EVCC should be classified under tariff item 8517 62 90 (communication apparatus) or 8708 90 99 (parts of motor vehicles), and whether exemption benefits would be available despite mismatch of HSN codes between Proof of Origin (POO) and Bill of Entry (BoE).

The applicant argued that EVCC performs functions of reception, conversion, and transmission of data over a wired network and thus qualifies as a communication apparatus under heading 8517. It further submitted that classification must be based on functional characteristics and relevant tariff rules, including the General Rules for Interpretation (GRI) and HSN explanatory notes.

The applicant also contended that EVCC cannot be classified as a part of motor vehicles under heading 8708, as Section Note 2(f) to Section XVII excludes electrical machinery of Chapter 85 from classification as vehicle parts. Additionally, where a specific heading exists, it must prevail over a general or residual heading.

On the issue of exemption, the applicant argued that mismatch of HSN code between POO and BoE should not deny preferential tariff benefits, provided the goods satisfy origin criteria under the applicable trade agreement. It was emphasized that classification and origin are distinct concepts, and that correct classification must be determined under Indian customs law irrespective of supplier-declared HSN.

The jurisdictional customs authority agreed that EVCC performs communication functions and merits classification under tariff item 8517 62 90. It also noted that classification under heading 8708 is not appropriate due to statutory exclusions.

Upon examination, the CAAR held that the application was valid and maintainable, including for ongoing import activities, with rulings having prospective effect.

On merits, the authority analyzed the functionality of EVCC and found that it performs reception, conversion, and transmission of signals between the electric vehicle and charging station. Based on these characteristics and applying the General Rules for Interpretation, the authority concluded that EVCC is correctly classifiable under tariff item 8517 62 90 as a communication apparatus.

The authority rejected classification under heading 8708, noting that electrical equipment falling under Chapter 85 is excluded from classification as motor vehicle parts under Section XVII.

Regarding exemption eligibility, the authority examined the legal framework governing preferential tariff treatment and noted that origin criteria and compliance with procedural requirements are central to such claims. It observed that classification must be determined independently based on tariff rules, and that incorrect HSN declared in foreign documents does not override correct classification under Indian law.

The authority concluded that the EVCC is classifiable under tariff item 8517 62 90. The ruling also clarified that advance rulings can be issued for ongoing imports but operate prospectively.

FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF CUSTOMS AUTHORITY OF ADVANCE RULING, DELHI

M/s Solterra Technologies Pvt Ltd, Ground Floor, 12/74, Pioneer Complex, Site-4, Industrial Area, Sahibabad, Ghaziabad,201010, hereinafter referred to as “the applicant”, filed the instant application in Form CAAR-1 before the Customs Authority for Advance Rulings, New Delhi (CAAR, in short) for seeking advance ruling. The complete application was received in the Secretariat of the CAAR, New Delhi on 09.12.2025 along with their enclosures in terms of Section 28H (1) of the Customs Act, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’). The IEC of the applicant is ABIC8402N. The applicant proposed to import of “Electric Vehicle Communication Controllers (EVCC)”.

1. The applicant in their application submitted as under :

1.1. M/s. Solterra Technologies Private Limited (the applicant, in short) is a company registered under Companies Act, 2013 incorporated ill year 2022 and having registered office at 12/74, Site-IV, Sahibabad, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh, India, 201010.

1.2. The Applicant is currently inter alia engaged in the business of manufacturing of electric charger for two and three electric wheelers. The applicant also engaged in the importing of certain items like rectifiers, and Supply Equipment Communication Controller (`SECC’) covered under CTI 8504 90 90 for automobile sector.

1.3. In the present application, the applicant is seeking an advance ruling regarding the classification of the Electric Vehicle Communication Controllers (Subject Goods’) and applicability of exemption notification on subject goods and SECC, which the applicant is currently importing under Customs Tariff Item (`CTI’) 8708 90 99 and 8504 90 90 of the First Schedule for the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (`Tariff Act’) and intends to continue importing in the future. The applicant is importing the subject goods originating in Republic of Korea from a foreign supplier based in Korea.

1.4. The subject goods are communication device fix in an electric vehicle (EV). It enables interaction with electric vehicle charging stations for exchanging various information enabling smooth charging of EV. The detailed step by step explaining the functioning of the subject goods is discussed as under:

Functions of the EVCC

I.S. The subject goods is a key communication device fix inside an EV. It ensures proper interaction with a charging station by following Combined Charging System (CCS’) standards (specifically DIN SPEC 70121 and ISO 15118). It plays the role of the “talking brain” inside the EV during charging.

1.6. The following key steps outline the initiation of EV charging via the Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE), detailing the communication sequence between the subject goods within the EV and the SECC embedded ill the EVSE.

Step-I Information shared by the Charging Cable to subject goods

• The user plugs the charging cable into the EV,
• The charging cable inter cilia has small pins such as Proximity Pilot (PP), Control Pilot (CP), Protective Earth (PE)
• When the plugs inserted in the EV Inlets the resister between PP and PE creates a specific voltage. This voltage is important to measure the current that cable can handle.
• Additionally, the CP pin in the Charging Cable sends the Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) signals to the subject goods. This signal tells the EV how much current it can draw from EVSE.

Step-2 Receipt of Information by the EVCC

• The subject goods receive the above Voltage and Signals from Charging Cable.
• The subject gOods read the voltage sent by PP and PE to detect the plug and identify the cable’s current rating.
• The subject goods read the PWM signals from CP line and figure out how much current it’s allowed to draw.
• Once the subject goods receive the voltage signal from PP and PE and the PWM signal from the CP line, it has enough information to confirm that a plug is connected, and charging is permitted.

Step-3 The subject goods wake up or ready its Internal system for Charging.

• If the handshake is successful, the CAN Bus within the EV aggregates data from various subsystems i.e. battery management system (BMS), onboard charger, vehicle status, etc.
• This data includes parameters like state of charge (SoC), maximum allowable charging power, temperature readings, and more.
• The subject goods acts as a central bridge, interpreting this data and preparing it for external communication with SECC embedded in charging station (EVSE).
• Once the subject goods have gathered and processed the necessary information from the CAN Bus, it communicates with the EVSE using Power Line Communication (PLC) compliant with ISO 15118 or DIN SPEC 70121 standards.
• The data is structured into protocol-specific messages and transmitted the messages through CP Line into SECC for further action.
• Only after all systems report “OK” then the EV send a message to the charger that EV is ready for the charging.
• Charging parameters like voltage, current, and SOC (state of charge) are dynamically exchanged between subject goods and SECC every few seconds. (through PLC protocol which used IS015118).
• The above steps ensure that the safe, smart, and secure charging by eliminating the excess transfer of voltage and other necessary information required for effective and efficient charging.

1.7. The pictorial representation of the subject goods is reproduced as under:

1.8. From the above, the principal function of subject goods could be gathered as follows:

-Reception:– Subject goods receive the Voltage and Signals from the Charging Cable which is connected to the EVSE.

-Conversion:– The subject goods after wakeup for charging, through CAN bus receives data/signals from the various other parts of the EV and converts it into analog signals for transmission over the CP Line.

-Transmission:– After the conversion of the data/signals received from other parts of the EV, the same data/signals are transmitted to SECC through CP Line.

1.9. The eligibility for filing the advance ruling is discussed in Annexure-B (i.e. in applicants’ submission). Thus, after satisfying the eligibility conditions and relying on the above facts of the current case, Applicant submits that in its case, the application shall be accepted for hearing on merits by Hon’hle CAAR, New Delhi.

In light attic aforementioned ^.facts, the applicant has posed the following questions for advance ruling before Hon’ble CAAR, New Delhi:

Questions in present Advance Ruling

Q1- Whether the ‘Subject Goods’ proposed to be imported by the Applicant merits classification under CTI 8517 62 90 or 8708 90 99 of the First Schedule to the Tariff Act?

Q2-If the subject goods do not find the merit classification under Cli 8517 62 90 or 8708 90 99, then what is the appropriate classification of EVCC under First Schedule to the Tariff Act?

Q3-Whether the applicant is eligible to avail the customs duty exemption underNotification No. 151/2009-Customs and Notification  No.152/2009-Customs, dated the 31st December, 2009 (for brevity collectively referred as N/No.-151 and 152) where the subject goods and SECC originating in Republic of Korea however the HSN code mentioned in the Proof of Origin differs from the legally correct HSN code declared in the Bill of Entry, and imported product is in fact is same in all nature.

STATEMENT CONTAINING APPLICANT’S INTERPRETATION OF LAW AND/OR FACTS, AS THE CASE MAY BE, IN RESPECT OF THE QUESTION(S) ON WHICH ADVANCE RULING IS REQUIRED

Applicant’s eligibility for Advance Ruling

The importer qualifies as an applicant under Section 28E(c) of the Customs Act, 1962 (`Customs Act’). Section 28E(c) of the Customs Act reads as under:

“applicant” means any person,—

(1) holding a valid Importer-exporter Code Number granted under section 7 of the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 (22 of 1992); or

ii. exporting any goods to India; or

iii. with a justifiable cause to the satisfaction of the Authority, who makes an application for advance ruling under section 2811″

1.10.  As stated ‘above, the Applicant -is a company registered in’ India and is holding a valid Importer-Exporter Code (`IEC’) ABICS8402N. Thus, the Applicant is rightly covered under the definition of ‘applicant’ as provided under Section 28E(c)(i) of the Customs Act for making this application.

1.11. Further, Section 28E (b) of the Customs Act provides the definition of advance ruling which can he read as under:

`a written decision on any of the qUestions referred to in section 2811 raised by the applicant in ‘his application in ,_respect of any goods prior to its importation or exportation’.

After careful reading of definition of advance ruling outlined in section 28E (b), the. following condition must be met by the applicant when seeking advance ruling:

First Condition: – Questions referred must be covered under section 2811 of Customs Act; and Second Condition: -Questions must be asked in respect of any goods prior to its importation or exportation

1.12. To meet the first conditions, reference should be made to Section 28H of the Customs Act, which allows an applicant to seek an advance ruling on the questions specifically listed in Section 28FI(2) of the Customs Act. Section 28H of the Customs Act reads as under:

“Section 28H- Application for advance ruling-

1. An applicant desirous of obtaining an advance ruling under this Chapter may make an application in such form and in such manner and accompanied by such fee as may be prescribed, Stating the question on which the advance ruling is sought.

2. The question on which the advance ruling is sought shall be in respect of,—

a. classification of goods under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (51 of 1975);

b. applicability of a notification issued under sub-section (1) of section 25, having a bearing on the rate of duty;

c. the principles to be adopted for the purposes of determination of value of the goods under the provisions of this Act;

d. applicability of notifications issued in respect of tax or duties under this Act or the Customs Tariff’ Act, 1975 (51 of 1975) or any tax or duty chargeable under any other law, for the time being in force in the same manner as duty of customs leviable under this Act or the Customs TariffAct;

e. determination of origin of the goods in terms of the rules notified under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (51 of 1975) and matters relating thereto,]

(fi any other matter as the Central Government may, by notification, specify.

4. An applicant may withdraw his application at any time before an advance ruling is pronounced

5. The applicant may be represented by any person resident in India who is authorised in this behalf.

Explanation.—For the purposes of this sub-section “resident” shall have the same meaning as assigned to it in clause (42) of section 2 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of I 961).”

1.13. In the present case, the applicant wishes to obtain the advance ruling on following questions: a) classification of subject goods under the Tariff Act and

a. applicability of notification issued under Section 25(1) of the Customs Act on import of EVCC and SECC originating in Republic of Korea.

b. Applicability of notification issued under Tariff Act on import of EVCC and SECC originating in Republic of Korea

1.14.Therefore, the question raised by the applicant falls within the purview of the provisions of Section 281-1(2)(a), 281.-1(2)(b), and 28H(2)(c) of the Customs Act. Hence, the first condition of Section 28E(b) stands satisfied.

1.15. To address the second condition, the Customs law provides that an application for advance ruling in respect of subject goods must be filed before its importation. As stated in facts of case that Applicant is currently engaged in importing of the subject goods and continue to import in future also, so by virtue of second condition of Section 28E(b) it does not mean that an Advance Ruling application can only be filed for any goods prior to its first importation.

1.16. Further, it is also important to understand the meaning of the term “its” used in the definition of advance ruling provided under Section 28E(b) of Customs Act. This is because the term “its” does not clarify whether advance ruling can only be sought prior to first importation of a particular goods which has never been imported or it can also be sought before importation of a goods which is being imported by the Applicant.

1.17. To interpret the term “its” used in Section 28E(b), reference is to be placed on Section 28- 1(2) of Customs Act which bars the CAAR authorities from entertaining any application for an advance ruling where the question raised in the application is already pending before any officer of Customs, the Appellate Tribunal, or any Court. From the provision, it can be deduced that any importer shall be eligible to make an advance ruling application for the same goods which have been imported before or in respect of which investigation is initiated except for any case where any lis’ is pending before any officer of customs or appellate authority in relation to the same subject mailer.

1.18.  Further, it is trite law that principle of harmonious construction must be kept in mind while construing any statute. This principle enunciates Ihat while interpreting any law, the statute must be read as a whole, and all the legal provisions must be read harmoniously to give effect to each word of the statute. Accordingly, to correctly interpret the intention of the legislation at hand. Section 28E(b) and Section 28­1(2) should be read together.

1.19. It is also pertinent to mention that it is a settled law that each import is a separate event as held in the matter of Join Exports Pvt. Ltd. K Union of India – 1987 (29) E.L.T. 753 (Del.) approved in 1992 (61) E.L.T. 173 (Supreme Court). Thus, usage of ‘its’ only further clarifies that for seeking an advance ruling every import of goods is to be treated as a separate event.

1.20. Accordingly, upon application of principle of harmonious construction and the fact that each import is a separate event, the Applicant is of the considered opinion that an advance ruling can also be sought prior to importation of a goods which is being imported by the Applicant (but before the importation in question takes place). Hence, the second condition of Section 28E(b) also stands satisfied.

1.21. Now corning to Section 28-I(2)(a) of the Act regarding procedure on advance ruling application, which says no application for advance ruling will be accepted if the question raised in the application is already pending before any forum. Relevant extracts of the provision are reproduced below:

SECTION 28-1. Procedure on receipt of application. –

1. …

2. The Authority may, after examining the application and the records called for, by order, either allow or reject the application:

Provided that the Authority shall not allow the application where the question raised in the application is *

(a) already pending in the applicant’s case before any officer of customs, .the Appellate Tribunal or, any Court;

(‘b) the sonic as in a matter already decided by the Appellate Tribunal or any Court :

Provided further that no application shall be rejected under this sub-section unless an opportunity has been’ given to the applicant of being heard:

ProVided also that where the application is rejected, reasons for such rejection shall be given in the order.

1.22. The Applicant submits that questions raised in the present application are not already pending before any officer of Customs, the Appellate Tribunal, or any court in relation to the Applicant. Further, the questions raised in the present case have not already been decided by the Appellate Tribunal or any court in the Applicant’s case.

1.23. As discussed above, the applicant has satisfied all the eligibility conditions, Hence, the Applicant has proceeded to file this application before the Hon’ble CAAR, New Delhi for kind consideration in respect of question posed in Annexure-A (i.e statement of facts).

Principle of Classification under Customs law

1.24. The levy of customs duty on import and export of goods into and out of India is regulated by the Customs Act. Section 12 of the Customs Act is the charging section which stipulates that duties of customs shall be levied on all goods imported into India or exported out of India at such rates as may be specified under the Tariff Act.

1.25. Section 2 of the Tariff Act provides that the rates at which BCD shall be levied under the Customs Act are specified in two schedules, namely, the first Schedule and the Second Schedule. First Schedule of the Tariff Act deals with the applicable duty structure on import of goods and the Second Schedule deals with the applicable duty structure on export of goods. To determine the said rates of BCD applicable on the imported goods it is important to identify the Customs tariff item under which the goods would fall under the First Schedule of the Tariff Act.

1.26.Classification of goods covered under the Customs Tariff is done as per the General Rules of Interpretation (‘GRI’). GRI 1 to 6 lay down the principles determining classification of goods under a specific Heading. Further, it is settled law that these GRI has to be followed sequentially.

1.27.GRI 1 stipulates that the goods under consideration should be classified in accordance with the terms of the Headings and any relevant Section or Chapter Notes. These Section or Chapter Notes and Sub-Notes give detailed explanation as to the scope and ambit of the respective Sections and Chapters. These Notes have been given statutory backing and have been incorporated at the beginning of each Section / Chapter. For ready reference, Rule 1 of GRI is extracted herein below:

“GENERAL RULES FOR THE INTERPRETATION OF THIS SCHEDULE Classification of goods in this Schedule shall be governed by the following principles :

Rule I. The titles of Sections, Chapters and Sub-Chapters are provided for ease of reference only; for legal purposes, classification shall be determined according to the terms of the headings and any relative Section or Chapter Notes and, provided such headings or Notes do not otherwise require, according to the following provisions”

1.28.The Larger Bench of the Hon’bie Tribunal in the matter of Saurashtra Chemical, PorbandarCollector of Customs, 1986 (23) E.L.T. 283 (Tri.) had held that the tariffs must be interpreted in the light of relevant Section and Chapter Notes which are statutorily binding like the Headings themselves. Thus, the Section and Chapter Notes have an overriding force on the respective Headings. This judgment was approved by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Saurashtra Chemicals vs. Collector of Customs, 1997 (95) E.LT. 455 (S.C.).

Harmonized System of Nomenclature (HSN)

1.29. The Customs Tariff in India is based on Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System, generally referred to as Harmonized System of Nomenclature (‘HSN’) developed by the World Customs Organization (‘WCO’)’which is applied uniformly by more than 137 countries of the world. Under the HSN, various goods are classified under different headings, sub-headings and tariff items. For the purposes of the uniform interpretation of the HSN, the WCO has published detailed explanatory notes to HSN which have long been recognized as a safe guide to interpret the Tariff Schedule.

1.30. In the case of 0. K. Play (India) Ltd. vs. C.C.E. Delhi 111, 2005 (180) E.L.T. 300 (S.C.), a 3-member bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India made the following observations:

a. There cannot be a static parameter for correct classification;

b. HSN along with the explanatory notes provide a safe guide for interpretation of an Entry;

c. Functional utility, design, shape and predominant usage have also got to be taken into account while determining the classification of an item;

d. Aforementioned aids and assistance are more important than the names used in the trade or common parlance in the matter of correct classification.

1.3.1. It was held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in L.M.L Limited vs. Commissioner of Customs, 2010 (258) E.L.T. 321 (S.C.) that in order to resolve a dispute on tariff classification, internationally accepted nomenclature emerging from HSN Explanatory Notes is a safe guide. Further. USN Explanatory Notes are also dependable guide for interpretation of Customs Tad ff. Some other judicial pronouncements wherein this proposition was also affirmed, upheld and followed have been enumerated below:

• Gujarat Perstorp Electronics Ltd. vs. LCC, 2005 (186) E.L.T. 532 (S.C.) (3-member S.C. bench)
• Corporation Ltd. vs. CCE, (2008) 223 E.L.L 9 (S.C.)

1.32. Therefore, the HSN Explanatory Notes are an important aid for ascertaining the classification of a good, in addition to the GRI and corresponding Chapter Notes and Section Notes. In the light of above facts, to analyze the classification of subject goods following needs to be kept in mind:

a. General Rules of Interpretation (GRI);

b. Heading/sub-heading of the First Schedule in conjunction with Section/Chapter/Explanatory notes;

c. Principal function of the subject goods.

Analysis of Heading 8517 and sub heading 8517 62 and Tariff Item 8517 62 90

Analysis of CPI 8517

1.33. CTH 8517 covers “other apparatus for the transmission or reception of voice, images or other data, including apparatus for communication in a wired or wireless network (such as a local or wide area network), other than transmission or reception apparatus of heading 8443, 8525, 8527 or 8528”. Relevant tariff item is reproduced as under for ready reference:

CTI	Dash	Description of Goods	BCD rate
8517		Telephone sets, including Smartphone and other telephones for cellular networks or for other wireless networks: other apparatus for the transmission or reception of voice, images or other data, including apparatus for communication in a wired or wireless network (such as a local or wide area network), other than transmission or reception apparatus of heading 8443, 8525, 8527 or 8528
	–	Other apparatus for transmission or reception of voice, images or other data, including apparatus for communication in a wired or wireless network (such as a local or wide area network):
8517 62	__	Machines for the reception, conversion and transmission or regeneration of voice, images or other data, including switching and routing apparatus
8517 62 90	___	Others   .	20%

1.34. In terms Rule 1 of GRI, subject goods should be classified in accordance with the terms of the headings and any relevant Section or Chapter Notes.

1.35.On reading of description of CTH 8517 it covers apparatus used for transmission or reception of voice, images or other data, including apparatus used for communication in a wired or wireless network. The apparatus whose principal function is to transmit or receive data or communicate in wired or wireless network are classified under this heading.

1.36. In this regard, HSN Explanatory Notes 2022 Editions provides the following explanation in respect of coverage under CTH 8517:

“This heading covers apparatus for the transmission or reception of speech or other sounds, images or other data between two points by variation of an electric current or optical wave flowing in a wired network or by electro-magnetic waves in a wireless network. The signals may he analogue or digital. The networks, which may he interconnected, include telephony, telegraphy, radio-telephony, radio-telegraphy, local and wide area networks.”

1.37. Based on a bare reading of the CTH 8517 and its relevant HSN Explanatory Notes, it appears that for a product to be classified under Tariff Heading 8517, it must meet the following criteria:

1. It must be an apparatus for the transmission or reception of voice, images, or other data.
2. Additionally, it could be an apparatus for communication between two points in a wired or wireless network.

1.38. The applicant submitted that the term ‘Apparatus’ has not been defined under the provisions of the Tariff Act. Therefore, the meaning as obtained from different dictionaries is reproduced herein as under –

-It is a collection or set of materials, instruments, appliances or machinery designed for a particular use (May. Web. Die).

-A compound instrument designed to carry out a specific function (Mc Graw Hill Dictionary of Scientific and Technical Terms).

-Webster ‘s Encyclopaedic Unabridged. Dictionary of the English Language which reads as under:

-a group or aggregate, of instruments, machinery, tools, materials etc., having a particular function or intended for a Specific use.

-any complex instrument or machine for a particular purpose.

-any system or systematic organization of activities. ‘Unctions, processes, etc., directed toward a specific, goal: the apparatus of government; espionage apparatus.

-Physio, a group of structurally different organs working together in the performance of a particular function: the digestive apparatus.

1.39.In the case of C NET Communication 11) (P) Ltd. vs. Commr. of Customs, (2007) 12 SCC 72, 82-83 (para 36), the word apparatus has been considered, and it has been observed that it ‘would certainly mean the compound instrument or chain of series of instruments designed to carry out a specific function or for a particular use’. Thus, the term Apparatus refers to a compound instrument or series of instruments designed to carry out a specific function.

1.40. The applicant submit that the subject goods are designed to carry out the specific functions of communication/exchanging of information and for particular use in EV. Thus, it is squarely covered within the meaning of apparatus.

1.41. As stated in facts of the present case, as per the ISO 15118, the standards governing the communications protocol between the EV and the charging station (EVSE) provides that communication happens through the power line communications network over a wired network (i.e., the charging cable).

1.42. Hence, considering the conditions for classification under CTH 8517 and the functional characteristics of the subject goods, the following points may be construed for ease of understanding.

• EVSE serves as the first point of communication. It initiates the transmission of data signals (i.e. voltage) through the charging cable.
• The EVCC, located within the EV, acts as the second point, receiving the transmitted data signals.
• The communication between SECC in EVSE and EVCC in FV occurs through Power Line Communication (PLC), which involves the exchange of signals/voltage over a wired network (i.e., the charging cable).

1.43. In view of the foregoing, it is submitted that the subject goods satisfy all the requisite conditions prescribed for classification under CTH 8517.

1.44. Given the above, the Applicant now needs to ascertain the classification at the six-digit and eight-digit level under the Tariff Act.

1.45. A bare perusal of the CTSH 8517 62 categorically provides that covers “machines for the reception, conversion and transmission or regeneration of voice, images or other data, including switching and routing apparatus” are included within its ambit.

1.46. Hence, machine which perform all three functions of reception, conversion and transmission are covered under CTH 8517 62. In this regard, reliance is placed on the decision of the Hon’hle Bombay Tribunal in the case of Reliance Jio JIVOcom Ltd., vs. CCE, 2019 (369) E.L.7. 1713 (Tri – Born) wherein while determining the classification of ‘Antenna’ the court: held that all the three functions of reception, conversion and transmission are required to be performed by a machine to fall under crsi-t 8517 62.

1.47. In context of present facts, it is submitted that the subject goods operates as complete machine in themselves and can perform the function of reception, conversion and transmission of data. Please refer to the below explanation clarifying the each function performed by subject goods:

-Reception:– Subject goods receive the Voltage and Signals from the Charging Cable which is connected to the EVSE.

-Conversion:- The subject goods after v✓akeup for charging, through CAN bus receives data/signals from the various other parts of the EV and converts it into analog signals’ for transmission over the CP Line.

-Transmission:- After the conversion of the data/signals^. received from other parts of the EV, the same data/signals are transmitted to.SECC through CP Line..

Only after all systems report “OK” then the EV send a message to the charger that EV is ready for the charging.

1.48. In view of the functionality of the subject good disCussed above, it is evident that the subject good performs transmission, conversion, arid reception of signals in a wired network and hence, merit classification under CTH 8517^.62 at the Six-digit level. Since the subject good is not specifically covered under any specific tariff entry at the eight-digit level, it merits classification in the residual category of ‘Others’ at eight-digit level i.e., C7H 8517 62 90.

1.49. in addition to above, it is also imperative to refer Note 2(a) of Section XVI which provides for classification of parts of machines. It states that parts which are goods of any heading of Chapter 84 or 85 are in all cases to be classified in the respective headings. Relevant extract of Section Note has been reproduced below for ease of reference –

“(a) parts which are goods included in any of the headings of Chapter 84 or 85 (other than headings 8409, 8431, 8448, 8466,8473, 848 8503, 8522, 8529, 8538 and 8548) are in all cases to be classified in their respective headings;”

The Note 2(a) of Section XVI clearly provides that if the.parts have the separate heading available in the Customs Tariff, then the parts will be classifiable in that heading only.

1.50. Therefore, upon bare reading of the above stated Section Note, it can be construed that subject goods which are an identifiable machine/good as a whole and perform the function of reception, conversion arid transmission of data merits classification under CTI 8517 62 90.

1.51. The Applicant wishes to draw the attention of Hon’ble CAAR, Delhi towards the pertinent ruling, recently pronounced by the National Commodity Specialist Division of the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Department vide Ruling No. N352297 dated August 20, 2025 , while dealing with similar issue of classification of Power Line Communication Module imported from South Korea, held that the principal functions of the said product is to convert and transmit specific signals. Accordingly, Power line communication module merit classification under CTI 8517.62.0090.

1.52. Since the HSN is globally aligned at six-digit level, this US ruling dated August 20, 2025 has the persuasive value for determining the classification under the Tariff Act.

1.53. In light of the above, and considering the existence of a specific tariff item supported by the HSN Explanatory Notes as well as the foregoing U.S. Customs Ruling, the subject goods should be classified under CTH 8517 and, more precisely, under CTI 8517 62 90.

Analysis of Heading 8708

1.54. At this juncture, the Applicant also considers it relevant to discuss heading of Chapter 87 under section XVII of the Tariff Act which covers vehicles (other than railway or tramway rolling stock) and parts and accessories thereof. The parts and accessories of motor vehicles are covered under CTH 8708. To understand the coverage of parts and accessories of motor vehicles, it is important to refer to Section notes of Section XVII.

1.55. In terms of Section Note 2W to Section XVII, electrical machinery and equipment of Chapter 85 of Tariff Act are not regarded” parts or accessories” of the goods of Section XVII even if they are identifiable for use with these goods. Note Section 2(f) to Section XVII is extracted hereunderfor reference purposes.

The expressions ‘parts” and “parts and accessories” do no! apply to the following articles, whether or not they are identifiable as for the goody of this Section:

(f) electrical machinery or equipment (Chapter 85);”

1.56. Section Note 2(I) of Section XVII thus explicitly excludes the electrical machinery or equipment of Chapter 85 from the purview of Section XVII.

1.57. Further, attention is made to Note 3 to Section XVII which provides that references in Chapters 86 to 88 to the “parts” or “accessories” do not apply to parts or accessories which are not suitable for use solely or principally with the articles of those Chapters. Section Note 3 can be read as follows:

References in Chapters 86 to 88 to ‘parts” or “accessories” do not apply to parts or accessories which are not suitable for use solely or principally with the articles of those Chapters.

1.58. On reading the above two section notes harmoniously it can be construed that a part or an accessory to merit classification under CTH 8708 should be suitable for use solely or principally with motor vehicles, Note 2(f) states that even such a part, which is suitable for use with motor vehicles, will not be regarded as part or an accessory classifiable under Chapter87, if such a part is an electrical machinery or equipment of Chapter 85.

1.39. In the instant case, the subject goods are principally used for the purposes of reception, conversion, and transmission of data over a wired network to communicate the signals/voltage between two points.

1.60, Further, the FISN explanatory notes under section XVII explain the scope of the terms “parts and accessories” Ibr the purpose of Section XVII. Relevant portion is extracted hereunder –

(III) PARTS AND ACCESSORIES

It should be noted that Chapter 89 makes no provision for parts (other than hull4 or accessories of ships, boats or floating structures. Such parts and accessories, even if identifiable as being for ships etc., are therefbre classified in other chapters in their respective headings. The other Chapters of this Section each provide for the classification of parts and accessories of vehicles, aircraft or equipment concerned

1.6.1.  It  should, however, be noted that for the goods to be classified under Chapter 86 to 88 of Section XVII, the following all three conditions needs to be satisfied namely:

-They must not he excluded by the terms of Note 2 to this Section

-They must be suitable for use solely or principally with the articles of Chapters 86 to 88 and

-They must not be more specifically included elsewhere in the Nomenclature

1.62. In this regard, the reliance has been placed on the CBIC ,instruction no. 01/2022-Customs dated January 05, 2022 wherein it is categorically stated that all three conditions as mentioned above needs to be fulfilled for classification under Chapter 86 to 88 of Section XVII.

From the above, it is apparent that for subject goods to be classified under 8708 as parts of the EV, it has to fulfil all the three conditions stated above.

Conditions for classification under Ch 86 to 88 of Section XVII	Conditions Fulfilled (YES/NO)	Legal Justification
Goods must not be excluded by the terms of Note 2 to Section XVII.	NO	Section Note 2(f) of XVII, specifically excluded the article of Chapter 85, however the subject goods is explicitly merits classification under Chapter 85.
Parts and Accessories which are suitable for use solely or principally with the articles of Chapters 86 to 88 are covered under this chapter 87.	YES for EV.	The subject goods is used solely or principally
They must not be more specifically included elsewhere in the Nomenclature	NO	As discussed earlier, the principal function of reception, conversion and transmission of subject goods specifically covered by the CTH 8517 and precisely in CTI 8517 62 90.

In light of the above discussion, the subject goods by virtue of the Section Note and HSN Explanatory
Rules of Chapter 87 shall not be covered as part of EV. Hence, shall not be classified under CTH 8708.

Specific Entry to prevail over general entry by virtue of GRI 3(a)

1.63. Without prejudice to the above contentions, reference is made to Rule 3(a) of the GRI which provides that the heading that provides the most specific description of the goods shall be preferred to headings providing a more general description. In this regard, Rule 3 of the GRI is extracted as below:-

“3. When by application of rule 2(b) or for any other reason, goods are, prima facie, classifiable under two or more headings, classification shall be effected as follows :

(a) The heading which provides the most specific description shall be preferred to headings providing a more general description. However, when two or more headings each refer to part only of the materials or substances contained in mixed or composite goods or to part only of the items in a set put up for retail sale, those headings are to be regarded as equally specific in relation to those goods, even if one of them gives a more complete or precise description of the goods.

1.64. Reliance in this regard is placed on the case of Mauri Yeast India (P.) Ltd. v. State of UP [2008(225) E.L.T. 321 (S.C.)] wherein it was held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that if there is a conflict between two entries one leading to an opinion that it comes within purview of tariff entry and another the residuary entry, the former should be preferred.

1.65.  Further, in the case of Dunlop India Ltd. & Madras Rubber Factory Ltd v. Union of India and Ors.,[1983 (13) E.L.T. 1566 (S.C.)], it was held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that an article classifiable under specific item cannot be classified under residuary Item.

1.66. Furthermore, reliance is placed on the decision of Hon’ble Tribunal, Mumbai bench in the Sirthai Superware India Ltd v. Commr. of Customs, Nhava Sheva-III, 2020 (371) E.L.T. 324 (Tri. -Mumbai), where the Tribunal observed that it is general principle of classification that specific entry should be preferred over the general entry.

1.67. Therefore, it is submitted that where the goods satisfy the requirements of a specific entry, that entry should cover the goods rather than the residual heading. In view of GRI 3(a) and the judicial precedents cited above, where there is a specific heading for the subject good under Chapter 85 (i.e.. CTH 8517), it will not merit classification in the residuary heading as parts of motor vehicles under CTH 8708.

Tariff Item Mismatch Between Proof of Origin Certificate and BoE: No Bar to FTA Exemption Classification and Assessment of goods in accordance with Customs law

1.68.Under the statutory scheme of the Customs Act, the process of assessment is fundamentally premised upon self-assessment by the importer. Section 17(1) of the Act mandates that the importer filing a Bill of Entry under Section 46 shall self-assess the duty leviable on the imported goods.

1.69. However, where on verification or examination the Proper Officer finds that the particulars declared in the BoE are incorrect, Section 17(2) empowers the officer to reassess the duty without prejudice to any further action under the Act. Thus, the customs administration retains supervisory authority to verify and correct the self-assessment.

1.70. Section 17, when read with the definition of “assessment” in Section 2(2), makes it abundantly clear that assessment is not confined merely to quantification of duty, but includes:

-determination of the dutiability of goods; and

-determination of the correct tariff classification under the Customs Tariff Act.

-determination of exemption or concession of duty.

Relevant provision is extracted as under for ready reference:

Section 17. Assessment of duty. –

1. An importer entering any imported goods under section 46, or an exporter enlering any export goods under section 50, shall, save us otherwise provided in seoion 85„ duly, if any, leviable on such goods.

(4) Where it is fimml on verification, examination or testing of the goods or otherwise that the self assessment is not done correctly,. the proper officer may, without prejudice to any other action which may he taken under this Act, re-assess the duty leviable on such goods.

Section 2(2):- Definition of “Assessment”

2. “assessment” 117e(117S determination of the dutiability of any goods and the amount of duty, tax, cess or any other sum so payable, if any, under this Act or under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (51 of 1975) (hereinafter referred to as the Customs Tariff Act) or wider any other law fir the time being in force, with reference to-

(a) the tariff classification of goods Os determined in accordance with the provisions of the Customs Tariff Act;

(h) the value of such goods as determined ins accordance with the provisions of this Act and the Customs Tariff Act,.

(c) exemption or concession of duty, tax, cess or any other sum, consequent upon any notification issued therefor under this Act or under the Customs Tariff Act or under any other law for the time being in farce;

d. the quantity, weight, volume, measurement or other specifics where such duty, tax, cess or any other sum is leviable on the basis of the quantity, weight, volume, measurement or other specifics of such goods;

e. the origin of such goods determined in accordance with the provisions of the Customs Tariff Act or the rules made thereunder, if the amount of duty, tax, cess or any other sum is affected by the origin of such goods;

f. any other specific factor which affects the duty, tax, cess or any other sum payable on such goods, and includes provisional assessment, self-assessment, re-assessment and any assessment in which the duty assessed is nild

1.71. Thus, classification of goods under the appropriate tariff heading/sub-heading/CTI is inseparable from the process of assessment. The Cu§tqiiis law mandates that classification must strictly follow:

• the provisions of the Tariff Act,
• the General Rules for Interpretation (GRI), and
• the HSN Explanatory Notes.

1.72. The Customs Act imposes duties on imported goods, and the correct classification of goods under the Tariff Act forms the basis for determining the applicable duty rate.

1.73.  Accordingly, the power to classify the goods rests with:

• the importer at the stage of self-assessment;
• the Proper Officer at the stage of verification/re-assessment; and
• the adjudicating and appellate authorities in cases of proceedings under Section 28 of the Customs Act.

1.74. For classification, reliance may be placed on product description, technical literature or supplier-declared HSN. However, the HSN declared by the foreign supplier is not binding on the importer or authorities. Classification must be based solely on the nature, function and characteristics of the imported goods.

1.75. Thus, even if the supplier indicates different HSN codes across invoices, packing lists or Proofs of Origin (P00), such variations do not prejudice the importer’s right to claim correct classification and corresponding duty benefits.

1.76.  Both the importer and the Customs authorities must classify the goods in accordance with the Tariff Act, GRI and HSN Explanatory Notes, irrespective of supplier-declared HSN code.

1.77. Incorrect HSN indicated by the foreign supplier cannot, by itself, disqualify the importer from claiming statutory benefits. Once the importer complies with the Customs Act, the Tariff Act and the rules thereunder, a mere procedural deficit in foreign documents cannot be a basis for denying substantive benefits such as preferential tariff concessions.

1.78. Therefore, the description, function, and characteristics of the actual goods imported prevail over any incorrect supplier-declared CTI/HSN.

Preferential Tariff Treatment to imported goods allowed as per Trade Agreement.

1.79. The Department of Commerce negotiates trade agreements, while CBIC implements tariff concessions and rules of origin through notifications issued under Section 25 of the Customs Act read with Section 5 of the Tariff Act.

1.80. As stated earlier, the Applicant has Importing the subject goods and SECC originating in the Republic of Korea and India has signed the Preferential Trade Agreement (PTA) with the Republic of Korea. The Government of India has officially vide Notification No. 187/2009-Customs (N.T), dated December 31, 2009, notified the Customs Tariff (Determination of Origin of Goods under the Preferential Trade Agreement between the Governments of the Republic of India and the Republic of Korea) Rules, 2009 (`India — Korea Origin Rules’).

1.81. Further, in exercise of power conferred in Section 25 of the Customs Act, CBIC vide N/No. 151 and 152 prescribes for full exemption and concessional duty exemptions, in case of goods imported and originated from the Republic of Korea.

1.82.  In terms of the N/No. 151 and 152, the description of goods and falling under the heading, sub heading and tariff item, when imported into India and importer proves that goods are originated from the Republic of Korea in accordance with the India — Korea Origin Rules are eligible for duty exemption.

I.83. In order to extend the preferential rate of duty under PTA, Section 28DA read with Customs (Administration of Rules of Origin under Trade Agreements) Rules, 2020 (CAROTAR) of the Customs law outlines the procedure to be followed for claiming the preferential rate of duty under a trade agreement.

1.84. On reading of Section 28DA( I) read with Rule 3(I) oICAROTAR, the importer shall declare the following at the time of f f ling bill ofentry for claiming preferential rate olduty under a trade agreement:

i. declare goods as originating in accordance with trade agreement,

ii. declare tariff notification issued

iii. produce the Proof of Origin (POO) (earlier known as Certificate of Origin (COO)),

iv. furnish POO reference number, date, criteria, direct shipment, etc.

Relevant provision is extracted as under for ready reference:

Procedure regarding claim of preferential rate of duty.

28DA. (1) An importer making claim for preferential rate of duty, in terms of any trade agreemera„shall,—

i. make a declaration that goods qualify as originating goods for preferential rate of duty under such agreement;

ii. possess sufficient information as regards the manner in which country of origin criteria, including. the regional value content and product specific criteria, specified in the rules of origin in the trade agreement, are satisfied;

_{iii. .}furnish such information in such manner as may be provided by rules;

iv. exercise reasonable care as to the accuracy and truthfulness of the information furnished

3. Preferential tariff claim.— (I) To claim preferential rate of duty under a trade agreement, the importer or his agent shall, at the time of filing hill of entry,

a. make a declaration in the bill of entry that the goods qualify as originating goods for preferential rate of duty under that agreement;

b. indicate in the bill of entry the respective tariff notification against each item on which preferential rate olduly is claimed;

c. produce [proof) of Origin covering each item on which preferential rate of duty is claimed; and

d. enter details of proof of origin in the bill of entry, namely:

i. proof of origin reference number;

ii. date of issuance of proof of origin;

iii. originating criteria;

iv. indicate if accumulation/cumulation is appliet

v. indicate if the proof of origin is issued by a third country (back-to-hack); and

vi. indicate if goods have been transported directlyfrom country of origin

1.85, In addition to above, Rule 4(1) of CAROTAR require importer to possess information, as indicated in Form I and submit the same to.the proper officer on request.

1.86. The meaning of POO is explicitly defined in Explanation to Section 28DA which provides that a certificate or declaration issued in accordance with a trade agreement certifying or declaring, as the case may be, that the goods fulfil ,the country of origin. criteria and other requirements specified in the said agreement. Definition of POO is extracted as under:

(a) ”proof of origin” means a certificate or declaration issued in accordance with a trade agreement certing or declaring, as the case may be, that the goods fulfil the country of origin criteria and other requirements specified in the said agreement

1.87.Importantly, for claiming the preferential rate of duty under trade agreement there is no requirement for the HSN code in the COO to match with HSN code mentioned in BoE rather the crucial condition is possession of POO certifying the subject goods and SECC are qualifying the origin criteria.

1.88. Thereafter, Section 28DA(10) read with Rule 3(2) of the CAROTAR, laid down four specific scenarios where the claim of preferential may be denied by the proper officer withOut verification if the POO: –

a. is incomplete and not in accordance with the format as prescribed by the Rules of Origin;

b. has any alteration not authenticated by the Issuing Authority;

c. is produced after its validity period nas expired; or

d. is issued for an item which is not eligible for preferential tariff treatment under the trade agreement

“28DA(10) Notwithstanding anything contained in this section, the preferential tariff treatment may be refused without verification in the following circumstances, namely:-

i. the tariff item is not eligible for preferential tariff treatment;

ii. complete description of goods is not contained in the proof of origin;

iii. any alteration in the proof of origin is not authenticated by the Issuing Authority;

iv. the proof of origin is produced after the period of its expiry, and in all such cases, the certificate of origin shall be marked as “INAPPLICABLE”,

3(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in these rules, the claim of preferential rate of duty may be denied by the proper officer without verification V the proof of origin-

a. is incomplete and not in accordance with the format as prescribed by the Rules of Origin;

b. has any alteration not authenticated by the Issuing Authority; Page 17 of 28

c. is produced after its validity period has expired; or

d. is issued for an item which is not eligible for preferential tariff treatment under the• trade agreement;

and in all such cases, the proof shall he marked as “INAPPLICABLE”. “

1.89. Upon a detailed examination of the four scenarios outlined above, it is observed that none of them provide any basis for denying preferential treatment under the trade agreement solely on the ground that the HSN code indicated in the POO does not correspond to the HSN code declared in the BoE.

1.90. Apart from above even Annexure III of India Korea Origin Rules which provide for procedure regarding claim of preferential tariff treatment wherein specifically Rule 7 inter alia provides that importer in importing country is required to produce POO and ensure that goods are originating in the exporting country in accordance with Rules of Origin outlined in India Korea Origin Rules.

1.9.1. Hence, once the subject goods qualifies the origin criteria under the PTA, then HSN mismatch is immaterial and benefit of preferential treatment shall be extended to subject goods and. SECC provided the legally correct HSN mentioned in BoE is squarely covered in tariff notification issued in importing country.

1.92. In light of the above contentions, it can be summarized as under that:

• Neither Section 28DA
• nor CAROTAR, 2020
• nor India—Korea Origin Rules

provide that an FISN mismatch between POO and BoE, by itself, disentitles the applicant from claiming preferential duty except when subject goods fail to satisfy the origin criteria.

1.93 The law requires verification of origin criteria, not classification alignment between HSN mentioned in POO and the USN mentioned in Bo[. FISN classification is a tariff issue, not an origin issue.

1,94. POO may reflect the USN as per Korean Customs classification, whereas First Schedule to Tariff Act may classify differently.

1.95. Pertinently, the subject goods and SECC remain same in physical form and:

• Description in POO matches the description in BoE.
• Technical literature, catalogues, invoices, packing list, all clearly establish identity.
• There is no dispute that subject goods are originating.
  Therefore, changing HSN has no consequence on origin criteria.

196. We would like to draw Hon’ble CAAR attention to the imported identical cases, the Customs Authority for Advance Ruling, Mumbai vide ruling Nos. CAA R/MUM/A RC/ 10/2022 dated 10.05.2022 in the case of M/s. Suraj Constructions held that the Clear Float Glass with absorbent layer on one side would merit classification under heading 7005 and more specifically under CTH 70051090, irrespective of the tariff heading mentioned in the Country of Origin Certificate (COO) and hence it was averred that the reliance placed by the assessing officer on the Classification mentioned in the COO is not legally relevant for determining the classification of impugned imports.

Accordingly, ruled that preferential treatment under PTA would not be adversely effected in the event of wrong mention of HSN code in POO.

1.97. Furthermore, in the following cases, it was held that the Country-of-Origin requirements were deemed to be fulfilled even where the gOods were classified differently in the Proof of Origin issued.

• Sheel ‘Chard Agrolls .Pvt Ltd, Mohan Goel, MD vs. Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), New Delhi (2016 (I) TMI 624 – CESTAT NEW DELHI)
• 111/s. Float Glass Centre Versus Commissioner of Customs, Chennai — 2025 (9) TMI 686— CESTAT CHEN1VA

1.98. Even the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in L.G. Electronics India Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of CustOmi, Civil Appeal Nos. 10349-10350 of 2024, has categorically held that preferential treatment under a PTA must be extended when the origin criteria of the imported goods are duly established to the satisfaction of the Deputy Commissioner or Assistant ‘Commissioner of Customs through a valid POO issued by the designated issuing authority in the exporting country.

1.99.  Therefore, it is a settled legal position that, for claiming preferential treatment under any trade agreement, the fulfilment of the prescribed origin criteria is of paramount relevance not the alignment of HSN in POO with BoE. Additionally, the goods in question must be covered under the applicable tariff notification issued by the importing country..

2. Comments of Concerned Port:

2.1 Comments from Concerned Port i.e. ACC Import, NCH, New Delhi, have been received vide mail dated 20.03.2026. In this regard, pointwise comments of this group are as follows;

i. Eligibility of the applicant, in terms of Section 28-E (c) of the Customs Act, 1962, to seek such advance ruling.

Yes, M/s Solterra Technologies Private Limited is a valid applicant within the meaning of Section 28E (c) (i) of the Customs Act, 1962, having IEC Code No. ABICS8402N.

ii. Applicability of proviso (1) of Section 28-1(2) of the Customs Act, 1962, regarding the question raised in the application.

As per records available in the Section, no such case of the applicant is pending with any officer of the Customs, other Appellate Tribunal or any Court under the proviso of Section 28(1) (2) of the Customs Act, 1962.

iii. Specify whether the claim of the applicant regarding the nature of the activity, i.e. It is ongoing/proposed, is correct;

As per the submissions made by the applicant, they are currently engaged in importing the subject goods and continue to do so in the future as well.

iv. Comments on the merit of the question raised in the application, along with all materials in support thereof;

Nature of activity proposed to be undertaken- Trading of EVCC (electric vehicle communication controllers) to the Automobile Industry.

2.2 Question of Law or fact;

a. Whether electric vehicle communication controllers proposed to be imported by the Applicant merits classification under CT I 85176290 or 87089099 of the first schedule to the Tariff Act?

b. If electric vehicle communication controllers do not find the merit classification under CTI 85176290 or 87089099, then what is the appropriate classification of EVCC under First Schedule to the Tariff Act?

c. Whether the applicant is eligible to avail the customs duty exemption under Notification No. 151/2009-Customs and Notification  No.152/2009-Customs, dated the 31st December, 2009  (for brevity collectively referred as N/No.-151 and 152) where the subject goods and Supply equipmentcommunication controllers originating in Republic of Korea however the HSN code mentioned in the Proof of Origin differs from the legally correct HSN code declared in the Bill of Entry, and imported product is in fact is same in all nature.

2.3 Comments-

As per information available in the public domain and submissions made by the applicant, Electric vehicle communication controller supports Bi-direction, vehicle to Grid communication (V2G) software for Electric Vehicle.

Tariff heading 8517 reads as: TELEPHONE SETS, SMARTPHONES AND OTHER TELEPHONES FOR CELLULAR NETWORKS OR FOR OTHER WIRELESS NETWORKS: OTHER APPARATUS FOR THE TRANSMISSION OR RECEPTION OF VICE, IMAGES OR OTHER DATA, IN CLUDING A PPARATUS FOR COMMUNICATION IN A WIRED OR WIRELESS NETWORK (SUCH AS A LOCAL OR WIDE AREA NETWORK), OTHER THAN TRANSMISSION OR RECEPTION APPARATUS OF HEADING 8443, 8525, 8527 OR 8528 Telephone sets, including smartphones and other telephones for cellular networks or for other wireless networks:

Tariff heading 8443 reads as: “PRINTING MACHINERY USED FOR PRINTING BY MEANS OF PLATES, CYLINDERS AND OTHER PRINTING COMPONENTS OF HEADING 8442; OTHER PRINTERS, COPYING MACHINES AND FACSIMILE MACHINES, WHETHER OR NOT COMBINED; PARTS AND ACCESSORIES THEREOF”, Printing machinery used for printing by means of plates, cylinders and other printing components of heading 8442.

Tariff heading 8525 reads as: “TRANSMISSION APPARATUS FOR RADIO-BROADCASTING OR TELEVISION, WHETHER OR NOT INCORPORATION RECEPTION APPARATUS OR SOUND RECORDING OR REPRODUCING APPARATUS, TELEVISION CAMERAS, DIGITAL CAMERAS AND VIDEO CAMERA RECORDERS”.

Tariff heading 8527 reads as “RECEPTION APPARATUS FOR RADIO-BROADCASTING WHETHER OR NOT COMBINED, IN THE SAME HOUSING, WITH SOUND RECORDING OR REPRODUCING APPARATUS OR A CLOCK – Radio-broadcast receivers capable of operating without an external source of power”.

Tariff heading 8528 reads as “MONITORS AND PROJECTORS, NOT INCORPORATING TELEVISION RECEPTION APPARATUS, RECEPTION APPARATUS FOR TELEVISION, WHETHER OR NOT INCORPORATING RADIO-BROADCASTRECEIVERS OR SOUND OR VIDEO RECORDING OR REPRODUCING APPARATUS”,

On the basis of bare reading of CTH 8517 it appears that Electric Vehicle Communication Controllers (EVCC) are classifiable under CTFI 8517 as it Covers “other apparatus for the transmission or reception of voice, images or other data, including apparatus for communication in a wired or wireless network”. Since the EVCC’s primary function is to manage data communication between the vehicle and charging equipment, it is treated as a communication apparatus.

Analysis of Sub Heading 851762:

“8517 62—Machines for the reception, conversion and transmission or regeneration of voice, images or other data, including switching and routing apparatus:”

On reading of description given in tariff for CTI-I 851762 it gets clear that Electric Vehicle Communication Controllers (EVCC) are classifiable under this sub heading as this product perform the function of reception, conversion and transmission of data (As information available in the public domain as well as provided by the applicant along with documentary evidence highlighting features and characteristic of product)

To ascertain specific tariff entry at the eight level, relevant CIFI along with description are produced hereunder,

8517 62 10 — PLCC equipment

8517 62 20 — Voice frequency telegraphy

8517 62 30 Moderns (modulators-demodulators)

8517 62 50 — Digital loop carrier system(DLC) – •

85.17 62 60 — Synchronous digital hierarchy system(SDH)

8517 62 70 — Multiplexers, statistical multiplexers

8517 62 90 —Others

Considering the functionality of EVCC it is evident that this product merit classification under CTH 8517 62 at the six digit level. Further this item/product is not specifically covered under any specific tariff entry at the eight digit level, hence it merits classification in the category of “Others” at eight-digit level that is 85176290.

2.4 Conclusion:

Question 1: Classification under CTI 85176290 or 87089099

Electric Vehicle Communication Controllers (EVCC) merit classification under CTI 8517 62 90 rather than CTI 8708 90 99.

CTI 8517 62 90: Covers “other apparatus for the transinission or reception of voice, images or other data, including apparatus for communication in a wired or wireless network”. Since the EVCC’s primary function is to manage data communication between the vehicle and charging equipment, it is treated as a communication apparatus.

CTI 8708 90 99: Covers “parts and accessories of motor vehicles.” However, Section Note 2(0 to SeCtion XVII explicitly excludes electrical machinery or equipment of chapter 85 from being classified under Chapter 87, even if they are suitable for use solely with motor vehicles.

Question 2: Appropriate Classification if not 8517 or 8708

If the EVCC is determined not to fall under the specific sub-headings mentioned above, its classification follows the General Rules for Interpretation (GRI):

CTH 8517: Is the most appropriate heading for EVCCs because they are essential for data exchange (PLC communication) during charging processes.

Question 3: Eligibility for Customs Duty Exemption (N/No. 151 & 152/2009)

As per Clause (d), sub-rule (2), Section 3 ‘of The Customs (Administration of Rules of Origin under Trade Agreement) Rules, 2020, the claim of applicant for exemptions under Notification No. 151/2009-Customs or Notification  No.152/2009-Customs, dated the 31st December, 2009 (India-Korea CEPA) may be denied by the proper officer in such a case wherein an HSN code mismatch in the Proof of Origin.

The relevant portion of the Rules is mentioned herein for ready reference,

“Clause (d), sub-rule (2), Section 3 of The Customs (Administration of Rules of Origin under Trade Agreement) Rules, 2020 includes the cases where goods are not covered in the respective notification or the product specific rule mentioned in the certificate of origin is not applicable to the goods”

(v) Whether the question raised is pending before any Officer of Customs, the Appellate Tribunal or any Court:

As per records available in the Section, no such case of the applicant is pending with any officer of the Customs, other Appellate Tribunal or any Court.

3. Personal hearing:

The representatives appeared before Authority on date 20.03.2026 and reiterated the facts already mentioned in the application in support of why their product should be considered for said classification and exempted of duty in said notification. The applicant is asked to submit invoices within one week. No One appeared from the department

4. Additional Submission of the applicant

The applicant vide email dated 24.03.2026 submitted additional submission which is as under:

4.1 The Office of the Principal Commissioner of Customs, Air Cargo Complex (Import), New Customs House, Near IGI Airport, New Delhi-110037 (“Jurisdictional Commissionerate”), has provided its comments on CAAR application No. 156/2025 filed by the Solterra Technologies Private. Limited (` the applicant’).

4.2 In its comments, the Jurisdictional Commissionerate has agreed with the classification of EVCC under

CTI 8517 62 90 as also argued by the applicant. Further, it is also mentioned that the Proper Officer may deny the preferential rate of duty without verification of the. Proof of Origin (“POO”) if it is found that the item is not covered under the respective tariff Notification or if the Product Specific Rules (“PSR”) mentioned in the certificate are not applicable to the goods.

In response to the comments of jurisdictional Commissionerate, the Applicant respectfully submits as under:

A. CTI 8517 62 90 is covered under Notification No. 151/2009 or 152/2009, dated 31 December 2009 tariff Notification”) and the Product Specific Rules (“PSR”)

1. With respect to the coverage of CTI 8517 62 90 under the Tariff Notification, heading 8517 is expressly mentioned at Serial No. 59. Accordingly, the goods are eligible for the Preferential Rate of Duty, subject to fulfilment of the India—Korea Origin Rules.

B. CTI mentioned by the Foreign Supplier differs from CTI 8517 62 90, but is still covered under the TariffNotification or PSR

1. The Applicant submits that if the Foreign Supplier has mentioned a CTI in the POO that differs from

the legally correct CTI 8517 62 90, but such legally incorrect CTI is nevertheless covered under the TatifiNotilication or PSR, the Applicant remains eligible for the Preferential Rate of Duty, provided the India-Korea Origin Rules are duly complied with.

In this scenario, both the CTI mentioned by the Foreign Supplier and the legally correct CTI 8517 62 90 fall within the scope of the TariffNotification. Therefore, the benefit of the preferential rate cannot be denied.

C. CTI mentioned in the POO is not covered under the Tariff Notification or PSR but the legal  y correct

CTI 8517 62 90 is covered

1. Even if the CTI mentioned in the POO is not covered under the Tariff Notification, the benefit should not be denied, because:

• The CTI mentioned in the POO is not legally determinative under the Customs Tariff Act and such incorrect CTI mentioned in POO viblates the provision of Section 2(2) of the Customs Act which says assessment includes correct tariff classification in accordance with Customs Tariff Act.
• The nature, description, and characteristics of the goods remain identical to those declared in the Bill of Entry.
• The legally correct CTI 8517 62 90 is duly covered under the Tariff Notification subject to fulfillment of origin criteria

2. Thus, an incorrect CTI reported by the Foreign Supplier cannot override the correct tariff classification under Indian Customs law.

Compliance with Rule 3 and  Rule 5 of the India—Korea Origin Rules

Rule 3 of the India—Korea Origin Rules provides that goods not wholly obtained or produced in the exporting State must satisfy Rule 5.

Rule 5 provides that goods shall be considered as originating if:

a. They satisfy the Product Specific Rules (PSR) in Annexure-I: or

b. For goods not covered under clause (a):

• • (i) The Regional Value Content (RVC) is not less than 35% of the FOB value, and
  • (ii) The goods undergo a Change in Tariff Classification (CTC) at the six-digit level of the Harmonized System from the tariff classification of all non-originating materials used.

Rule 3(2) of the India Korea Origin Rules further provides that goods conforming to Rule 3(1) which prescribes that goods deemed to be originating if it satisfies the criteria prescribed by Rule 5 for goods not wholly obtained or produced in the exporting state shall be eligible for preferential tariff treatment.

Accordingly, as long as the Applicant satisfies the origin criteria under Rule 5, an incorrect CTI reported in the POO cannot be a ground for denying preferential duty benefits.

As highlighted in original submissions, multiple judicial pronouncements have consistently held that the POO is intended to determine the origin criteria, and not to conclusively determine the tariff classification of the goods.

Therefore, a mismatch in CTI between the BOE and the POO when the original criteria are duly met cannot be a valid ground for denial of preferential duty.

5. Discussion, Findings and Conclusion

5.1 Having examined the CAAR-1 application, the comments received from the Jurisdictional Customs Commissionerate, the record of personal hearing and the applicable legal framework, I find the application to be valid in terms of the Customs Act, 1962 and the CAAR Regulations, 2021. I, therefore, allow the application and proceed to determine the classification of ‘Electric Vehicle Communication Controllers'(EVCC)(subject goods) and eligibility of exemption notification on the basis of the information on record.

5.2 Before examining the case on merit, I find that as per the submission of the applicant, the import of subject goods is an ongoing activity. In this regard, I find that after changes made in Section 28E(b), there is no requirement of a ‘proposed activity’ and ruling can be obtained on ongoing activities also and it will be applicable prospectively. The same stand has been taken by Authority of Advance Ruling in earlier cases also. In view of above, I hold that there is no bar in issuing advance ruling for any ongoing activity and ruling can be obtained in respect of any good prior to its importation or exportation clearly denote that such ruling will have prospective effect in respect of the goods for which ruling is obtained. Reliance in this regard is being placed on the Advance Ruling issued by CAAR Mumbai in the case of Amazon Seller Services Pvt. Ltd., (2023) 5 Centax 186 (A.A.R. – Cus. – Mum.), whereby the CAAR authority in para 8 has stated the following:

“8… Insofar as the issue of advance rulings in respect of an ongoing activity is concerned, with due regard to the definition of advance ruling in law, it is my considered opinion that operation of advance rulings do not get extinguished just because an activity of import/export has taken place earlier, irrespective of the frequency of such activity. Drawing strength from the provisions of law reproduced earlier in this paragraph, a correct interpretation would be that advance rulings can be sought and given even for ongoing activities, so long as such activities, in respect of the same applicant, are not involved in any dispute; or already settled by an order of any competent tribunal/court. However, the application of such an advance ruling, in respect of an ongoing activity, shall be prospective and would not have any implication for activities, which stand concluded. “

. Product description:

5.3 The product in question is Electric Vehicle Communication Controllers (EVCC). The Electric Vehicle Communication Controllers (EVCC) is a key communication device fix inside an Electric Vehicle. Its function is providing support for proper interaction with a charging station by following Combined Charging System (CCS) standards (specifically DIN SPEC 70121 and ISO 15118). It plays the role of the “talking brain” inside the EV during charging.

5.4 The principal function of subject goods, i.e. Electric Vehicle Charging Controllers (EVCC) is as follows:

Reception:- At first, Subject goods, i.e. Electric Vehicle Charging Controllers (EVCC) receive the Voltage and Electrical Signals from the Charging Cable which is connected to the Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE).

Conversion:- The second function is conversion of signals. The Electric Vehicle Charging Controllers (EVCC) after wakeup for charging, through Controller Area Network (CAN) bus receives data/signals from the various other parts of the Electric Vehicle and converts electrical signals into analog signals for transmission over the Control Pilot (CP) Line.

Transmission:- The third function is transmission. After the conversion of the signals received from other parts of the Electric Vehicle (EV), the same signals are transmitted to Supply Equipment Communication Controller (SECC). This exercise is done through Control Pilot (CP) Line.

A diagram explaining the functionality of the Electric Vehicle Charging Controllers (EVCC) is as under:

5.5 As per the subject CAA IZ application, the following key steps outline the initiation of EV charging via

the Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE), detailing the communication sequence between the subject goods, i.e. Electric Vehicle Communication Controller (EVCC) within the EV and the Supply Equipment Communication Controller (SECC) embedded in the Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE):

a. Step-1 Information sharing by the Charging Cable to subject goods

As first step, the user plugs the charging cable into the EV. The charging cable inter cilia has small pins such as Proximity Pilot (PP), Control Pilot (CP), Protective Earth (PE). When the plugs are inserted in the EV Inlets, the resister between PP and PE creates a specific voltage. This voltage is important to measure the current that cable can handle. Additionally, the CP pin in the Charging Cable sends the Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) signals to the subject goods. This signal tells the EV how much current it can draw from EVSE.

b. Step-2 Receipt of Information by the Electric Vehicle Communication Controller (EVCC)

The second stage is reception and collection of data. The subject goods receive the above Voltage and Signals from Charging Cable. The subject goods read the voltage sent by Proximity Pilot (PP) and Protective Earth (PE) to detect the plug and identify the cable’s current rating. The subject goods read the PWM signals from CP line and figure out how much current it’s allowed to draw. Once the subject goods receive the voltage signal from Proximity Pilot (PP) and Protective Earth (PE) and the Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) signal from the Control Pilot (CP) line, it has enough information to confirm that a plug is connected, and charging is permitted.

c. Step-3 The subject goods wake up or ready its Internal system for Charging.

Once second stage is complete and if the handshake is successful, the Controller Area Network (CAN) Bus within the Electric Vehicle aggregates data from various subsystems i.e. battery management system (BMS), onboard charger, vehicle status, etc. This data includes parameters like state of charge (SoC), maximum allowable charging power, temperature readings, and other such data. The Electric Vehicle Communication Controller (EVCC) acts as a central bridge, interpreting this data and preparing it for external communication with Supply Equipment Communication Controller (SECC) embedded in charging station, i.e., Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE). Once the subject goods have gathered and processed the necessary information from the CAN Bus, it communicates with the EVSE using Power Line Communication (PLC) compliant with ISO 15118 or DIN SPEC 70121 standards. The data is structured into protocol-specific messages and transmitted the messages through Control Pilot (CP) Line into Supply Equipment Communication Controller (SECC) for further action. It is only after all systems report “OK”, that the Electric Vehicle send a message to the charger that Electric Vehicle is ready for the charging. Charging parameters like voltage, current, and SOC (state of charge) are dynamically exchanged between subject goods and SECC every few seconds. (through PLC protocol which uses IS015118). The above steps ensure that the safe, smart, and secure charging by eliminating the excess transfer of voltage and other necessary information required for effective and efficient charging.

Issue of classification:

5.6  On the basis of the facts presented before me in the present application, I find that the first question for determination is the correct classification of the said “EVCC” under the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, and in particular whether the goods merit classification under CTH 8517 62 90 as claimed by the applicant and agreed by the Jurisdictional Commissionerate, or under any other competing heading such as Heading 8708 90 99.

5.7  It is a well-settled principle of law that the classification of goods under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 is governed by the General Rules for the Interpretation of the Import Tariff (GRI). Rule 1 of the WCO’s General Rules of Interpretation states that customs classification is based on the terms of headings and relevant Section or Chapter Notes, not on titles, which serve only as reference and have no legal standing. Rule 1 of GRI is as under:

“Rule 1: The titles of Sections, Chapters and sub-Chapters are provided for ease of reference only; for legal purposes, classification shall be determined according to the terms of the headings and any relative Section or Chapter Notes and, provided such headings or Notes do not otherwise require, according to the following provisions.”

5.8 Further, GRI 3(a) of the Harmonized System of Nomenclature provides that when goods are, prima facie, classifiable under two or more headings, classification shall be determined by the heading that offers the most specific description. Rule 3(a) of GRI is as under:

“Rule 3: When by application of rule 2(b) or for any other reason, goods are, prima facie, classifiable under two or more headings, classification shall be affected as follows: a. The heading which provides the most specific description shall be preferred to headings providing a more general description. However, when two or more headings each refer to part only of the materials or substances contained in mixed or composite goods or to part only of the items in a set put up for retail sale, those headings are to be regarded as equally specific in relation to those goods, even if one of them gives a more complete or precise description of the goods.”

Analysis of CTH 8517

5.9 CTH 8517 covers “other apparatus for the transmission or reception of voice, images or other data, including apparatus for communication in a wired or wireless network (such as a local or wide area network), other than transmission or reception apparatus of heading 8443, 8525, 8527 or 8528”. Relevant tariff item is reproduced as under for ready reference:

CTI	Dash	Description of Goods	BCD rate
[ 8517		Telephone sets, including Sniartphone and other telephones for cellular networks or for other wireless networks: other apparatus for the
		transmission or reception of voice, images or other data, including apparatus for communication in a wired or wireless network (such as a local or wide area network), other than transmission or reception apparatus of heading 8443, 8525, 8527 or 8528
	–	Other apparatus for transmission or reception of voice, images or other data, including apparatus for communication in a wired or wireless network (such as a local or wide area network):
8517 62	—	Machines for the reception, conversion and transmission or regeneration of voice, images or other data, including switching and routing apparatus
8517 62 90		Others	20%

5.10 Further, HSN Explanatory Notes provides the following explanation in respect of coverage under CTH 8517:

“This heading covers apparatus for the transmission or reception of speech or other sounds, images or other data between two points by variation of an electric current or optical wave flowing in a wired network or by electro-magnetic waves in a wireless network. The signals may be analogue or digital. The networks, which may be interconnected, include telephony, telegraphy, radio-telephony, radio-telegraphy, local and wide area networks.”

5.11 Thus, based on a bare reading of the CTH 8517 and its relevant EISN Explanatory Notes, it is observed that for a product to be classified under Tariff Heading 8517, it must be an apparatus for the transmission, or reception of voice, images or other data in a wired network or by electro-magnetic waves in a wireless network. I find that in the present case, Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE) serves as the first point of communication. It initiates the transmission of data signals (i.e. voltage) through the charging cable. Then the Electric Vehicle Communication Controller (EVCC) (subject goods), located within the Electric Vehicle, acts as the second point, receiving the transmitted data signals. Thereafter, the communication between Supply Equipment Communication Controller (SECC) in Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE) and Electric Vehicle Communication Controller (EVCC) in Electric Vehicle (EV) occurs through Power Line Communication (PLC), which involves the exchange of signals/voltage over a wired network (i.e., the charging cable). Therefore, the subject goods satisfy all the requisite conditions prescribed for classification under CTF1 8517.

5.12 I further observed that the CTSH 8517 62 categorically provides for “machines for the reception, conversion and transmission or• regeneration of voice, images or other data, including switching and routing apparatus”. As per the product details provided in the subject application, the product performs reception, conversion and transmission functions as elaborated at para 5.3. Thus, it is evident that the subject good performs transmission, conversion, and reception of signals in a wired network and hence, merit classification under CTH 8517 62 at the six-digit level. Since the subject good is not specifically covered under any specific tariff entry at the eight-digit level, it merits classification in the residual category of ‘Others’ at eight-digit level i.e., CTH 8517 62 90.

5.13 In addition to above, I have also noted that as per Note 2(a) of Section XVI, Section Note also supports the case of the applicant. The same is provided as below:

“(a) parts which are goods included in any of the headings of Chapter 84 or 85 (other than headings 8409, 8431, 8448, 8466,8473, 8487, 8503, 8522, 8529, 8538 and 8548) are in all cases to he classified in their respective headings;”

5.14 Thus, I find that the Note 2(a) of Section XVI clearly provides that if the parts have the separate heading available in the Customs Tariff, then the parts will be classifiable in that heading only. Therefore, upon bare reading of the above stated Section Note, it can be construed that subject goods which perform the function of reception, conversion and transmission of data merit classification under CTI 8517 62 90.

Analysis of CTH 8708 — Alternate Classification

5.15 I have also analysed alternate heading 8708. Chapter 87 under section XVII of the Tariff Act covers vehicles (other than railway or tramway rolling stock) and parts and accessories thereof. The parts and accessories of motor vehicles of headings Nos. 87.01 to 87.05 are covered under CTH 8708.

5.16 Further, Section Note 2(f) to Section XVII is extracted hereunder for reference purposes:

The expressions “parts” and “parts and accessories” do not apply to the following articles, whether or not they are identifiable as for the goods of this Section:

(t) electrical machinery or equipment (Chapter 85);”

5.17 Thus, I find that that Note 2(f) of Section XVII explicitly excludes the electrical machinery or equipment of Chapter 85 from the purview of Section XVII. Further, GR1 3(a) of the Harmonized System of Nomenclature provides that when goods are, prima facie, classifiable under two or more headings, classification shall be determined by the heading that offers the most specific description. It is, thus, amply clear that CTH 8517 62 90 is the most appropriate CTI for the subject goods, as this CTH is most specific for the subject goods.

6. The second issue raised in application is related to Eligibility for Customs Duty Exemption (Notification No. 151 & 152/2009) in case of mismatch between HSN in Proof of Origin Certificate and Bill of Entry (BoE) filed by the Applicant

6.1 The Applicant has submitted that they are importing the subject goods, i.e. Electric Vehicle Communication Controller (EVCC) originating in the Republic of Korea. Further, the applicant has submitted that the CTH for the subject goods (as declared by the exporter) may be different in the POO (Proof of Origin) certificate as compared to the CTH of the subject goods going to be declared (by the importer) in the import documents. The applicant has requested for ruling that mis-match of CTH in POO (Proof of Origin) certificate and import documents has no bearing on the applicability of duty exemption videNotification No. 151/2009 and 152/2009, and that the subject goods are liable for duty exemption as per Notification No. 151/2009-Customs or Notification No. 152/2009-Customs (India-Korea CEPA) inspite of mismatch.

6.2 I have observed that the Port Commissionerate is not agreeable with above contention. As per the comments of Jurisdictional Commissionerate, “as per Clause (d), sub-rule (2), Section 3 of The Customs (Administration of Rules of Origin under Trade Agreement) Rules, 2020, the claim of applicant for exemptions under Notification No. 151/2009-Customs or Notification No. 152/2009-Customs (India-Korea CEPA) may be denied by the proper officer in such a case wherein an HSN code mismatch in the Proof of Origin.”

6.3 I observe that preferential duty exemption under country of origin—based schemes (such as FTAs/PTAs) is conditional upon strict compliance with the prescribed Rules of Origin as well as procedural requirements, including the submission of a valid Proof of Origin (P00). One of the essential particulars in the POO is the correct classification of goods under the Harmonised System (HSN). A mismatch between the HSN declared in the POO and that declared in the Bill of Entry raises a fundamental inconsistency regarding the identity and nature of the goods.

6.4   I further note that Rules of Origin are product-specific and often hinge upon tariff classification criteria

such as Change in Tariff Heading (CTH), Change in Tariff Sub-heading (CTSH), or Regional Value Content (RVC). The determination of origin is intrinsically linked to the correct classification of goods declared in POO. In a situation where the HSN code in the POO differs from that in the Bill of Entry, it becomes impossible to conclusively verify whether the applicable origin criteria have been satisfied. Consequently, the substantive condition for availing preferential duty—i.e., proof of origin—remains unfulfilled, leading to ineligibility for exemption. It is important to note that POO issuing authority is not under obligation to accept the classification declared by importer and importer cannot seek any ruling from CAAR to force the POO issuing authority because its beyond Authority’s jurisdiction.

6.5 I also find that the Certificate of Origin is not a mere procedural document but a substantive evidentiary instrument, the authenticity and accuracy of which must be beyond doubt. A discrepancy in HSN classification between the POO and import documents indicates either an error in certification or a misdeclaration at the time of import. In either case, the benefit of doubt cannot be extended to the importer, as preferential exemptions are to be construed strictly. It is a settled principle that the burden of proving eligibility to an exemption lies squarely on the claimant, and any ambiguity must operate against the grant of such benefit.

6.6 I find that the judicial precedents relied upon by the applicant are distinguishable and have no direct applicability to the present case, as they were rendered in a materially different factual and legal context. The facts, nature of the goods, and relevant statutory provisions involved herein differ substantially from those in the cited decisions, and it is a settled principle that precedents apply only where there is parity in material facts and issues. In the absence of such similarity, reliance on the said judgments is misplaced and does not advance the applicant’s case.

6.7  Therefore, in view of the above, I conclude that the benefit of country of origin—based duty exemption is not admissible in the case of any mismatch in CTH.

6.8  In light of the forgoing facts, submissions of applicant and discussions, I am of the view that “Electric Vehicle Communication Controller” is appropriately classifiable under CTH 85176290. Further, the claim of duty exemption benefit under Notification no. 151/2009-Customs and Notification  No.152/2009-Customs, dated the 31st December, 2009  will not be available to the applicant in case of mismatch between CTH of the subject goods in Proof of Origin certificate and Bill of Entry.

7. I, rule accordingly.