2012(02)LCX0238

IN THE CESTAT, SOUTH ZONAL BENCH, BANGALORE

S/Shri P.G. Chacko, Member (J) and P.R. Chandrasekharan, Member (T)

Commissioner of Custom, Hyderabad

Versus

Axion Energy Conversion Pvt. Ltd.

Final Order No. 108/2012, dated 8-2-2012 in Appeal No. C/455/2006

Cases Quoted -

Himachal Futuristic Communications Ltd. v. Commissioner - 2005(02)LCX0201 Eq 2005 (183) ELT 0092 (Tribunal) - Referred [Para 2]

Advocated By -

Shri Canesh Havanur, Addl. Commissioner (AR), for
the Appellant.
None, for the Respondent.

[Order per : P.R. Chandrasekharan, Member (T)] -

This appeal filed by the Revenue is against Order-in-Appeal No. 23/2006 (H-II)-Cus., dated 28-6-2006, passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Hyderabad. Vide the impugned order, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) extended the benefit of Notification No. 21/2002 dated 1-3-2002 vide SL. No. 319 to 'Chargers of Mobile Telephones' imported by the respondent, M/s. Axion Energy Conversion Pvt. Ltd.


2. The learned Additional Commissioner (AR) submits that the chargers of mobile telephones are not parts of the telephones, but are accessories of the mobile telephones. Vide SL. No. 319 of Notification No. 21/2002, concessional rate of Customs duty has been provided to "Parts of Cellular Phones" falling under CTH No. 8529.9090. He submits that since chargers are not parts but accessories, benefit of the said duty exemption is not applicable. He also relies on the judgment of this Tribunal in the case of Himachal Futuristic Communications Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi reported in 2005(02)LCX0201 Eq 2005 (183) ELT 0092 (Tri. - Del.) in support of his contention.


3. The respondent, on other hand, in their written submissions, submits that the chargers are classifiable under Heading 8529.90 and as per the Tariff, the said item is part of Cellular Phones and therefore, they are rightly entitled for the benefit of the said exemption.


4. We have carefully considered the rival submissions. In the instant case, there is no dispute about the fact that the produces under importation are classifiable under Heading No. 8529.90 of the Customs Tariff. The Chapter Heading No. 8529 deals with "parts suitable for use solely or principally with the appropriate Headings 8525 to 8528". Therefore, if classification is under Heading No. 8529.90, obviously the goods are parts suitable for use solely or principally with the appropriate Heading 8525 to 8528. Therefore, the charger will be 'part of the mobile telephone' for the purpose of classification under the Customs Tariff. No-tification No. 21/2002 under SL. No. 319 prescribes a concessional rate of duty of 5% adv. on parts of Cellular Telephone falling under 8529.90. Therefore, the product is rightly entitled for benefit of Notification under the said entry. In view of the fact that the tariff heading itself covers only parts under Heading 8529, there cannot be two different interpretation on parts one for the purpose of notification and another for the purpose of the tariff. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the lower appellate authority. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal filed by the Revenue as devoid of merits.

(Operative portion of the order was pronounced in the open Court)

Equivalent 2013 (295) ELT 0234 (Tri. - Bang.)