2016(04)LCX0014

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

A.K. Sikri and Rohinton Fali Nariman, JJ.

Commissioner of Customs, Chennai

Versus

Celetronix India Pvt. Ltd.

Civil Appeal No. 4147 of 2007^ with C.A. No. 2038 cf 20142, decided on 22-4-2016

Advocated By -

S/Shri K.S. Radhakrishnan, Sr. Advocate, Ms. S.
Manchanda, Ms. Rukhmini Bobde for B. Krishna Prasad, Advocates, for the Appellant.
S/Shri V. Lakshmikumaran, M.P. Devanath, Hemant Bajaj, Ms. L. Chamaye, Aditya Bhattacharya, Anandh K., Rupesh Kumar, Jitin Singhal and Pravesh Bahuguna, Advocates, for the. Respondent

[Order].

The issue in these appeals is as to whether the goods of the respondents would classify as "Compact Media Centre" or "K-Yan Computer Systems". We find that the Tribunal, while deciding the issue in favour of the as-sessee [2006(12)LCX0082 Eq 2007 (211) ELT 0553 (Tribunal)] and categ orizing the same as "K-Yan Computer Systems", has gone by the opinion of the Additional Director, Department of Technology, Government of India who has clarified the position as under :
"From the catalogue, it is noted that K-Yan has been developed with IIT (Bombay). The product combines the computing power of a complaint with large screen display provided by an in-built projection system to delivery powerful outcomes through the use of technology for large screen projection to a wider audience. The projection system cannot be used in isolation but replaces the functionality of a monitor."
2. Tlie view of the Tribunal is, thus, based on cogent material and does not call for any interference.
3. In view of the above, these civil appeals are dismissed

Equivalent 2016 (335) ELT 0582 (S.C.)