In re Apple India Private Limited (CAAR Mumbai)
The Customs Authority of Advance Ruling (CAAR) in Mumbai has denied a request from Apple India Private Limited to amend an earlier order regarding the customs classification of its HomePod product. Apple had sought to renew a previous ruling that classified the HomePod under Customs Tariff Heading (CTH) 8517 62 90. However, the CAAR had previously declined to issue a new ruling, citing a prohibition under Section 28I(2)(b) of the Customs Act, 1962. This section prevents the authority from ruling on a matter that has already been decided by a court.
Apple argued that the High Court of Delhi’s ruling, which the CAAR referenced, pertained to a different product (Amazon Echo) and not the HomePod. However, the CAAR found that Apple’s own previous application, dated February 18, 2025, contradicted this new argument. In that application, Apple itself had submitted that the Delhi High Court had concurred with the classification of the Apple HomePod as a “convergence device” under CTH 8517. The CAAR stated that Apple could not use the High Court’s judgment to support its desired classification in one instance and then disavow its applicability in another.
The CAAR determined that the fundamental question—the customs classification of a multi-function “convergence device”—had been settled by a High Court, thereby activating the prohibition under Section 28I(2)(b). The authority stated that the law requires the question to be the same, not the specific applicant or product model. Since Apple had previously acknowledged that the High Court had examined and agreed with the classification principle for such devices, the CAAR found no legal or factual basis to modify its earlier order. Consequently, Apple’s request for a corrigendum was rejected.
