CCE Aurangabad Vs Videocon Industries Limited

Case snapshot

Sections / provisions: See packaged judgment

Questions before the Court / Tribunal

• Customs classification of imported LCD panels used in televisions/audio products.
• What factual, statutory and procedural conditions control the relief?
• How does the operative order apply to the parties and the challenged proceeding?

Material facts and procedural background

2. In the first appeal1, the assessee is M/s Videocon International (hereafter

whereby import of LCD panels by the assessee i.e., M/S Harman International

ruled against the assessee and held that the goods were classifiable under CH

8529. 9090. The assessee’s appeal succeeded, and the Commissioner directed a

notice, and affirmed the classification proposed by it; the assessee appealed

Appellant / assessee submissions

Whereas, the revenue contended that the LCD panels were to be

7. Ms. Nisha Bagchi, learned counsel appearing for the revenue, argued that

the findings of the CESTAT are erroneous. She argued that the literature and

8. Counsel argued that heading 90.13 covers only those articles which are

Revenue / respondent submissions

7. Ms. Nisha Bagchi, learned counsel appearing for the revenue, argued that

26. The main argument of the Appellant is that because the car mats are made specifically for cars and are used also in cars, they should be identified as parts and accessories. But if we go by that logic, textile carpets could not have been excluded from Parts and Accessories. We have referred to such exclusion in the preceding paragraph. It has also been urged on behalf of the revenue that these items are not commonly identified as carpets but are different products. The Tribunal on detailed analysis on various entries, Rules and Notes have found they fit the description of goods under chapter heading 570390.90. We accept this finding of the Tribunal. Once the subject goods are found to come within the ambit of that sub-heading, for the sole reason that they are exclusively made for cars and not for "home use" (in broad terms), those goods cannot be transplanted to the residual entry against the heading 8708. As we find the subject-goods come under the chapter-heading 570390.90, and the other entry under the same Chapter forming the subject of dispute in the second order of the Commissioner, in our opinion, there is no necessity to import the "common parlance" test or any other…

Court / Tribunal analysis and reasoning

G.S. Auto (supra), this court held that the true test for classification is the test of

Section XV of base metal, and it was in view of this note that this Court held that

Excise, Nagpur v Simplex Mills Co. Ltd.,9 where the Court held that the Rules

“25. We do not find any error in such reasoning. Chapter 87 of the Central Excise Tariff of India does not contain car mats as an independent tariff entry. We have reproduced earlier the various parts and accessories listed against tariff entry 8708. All of them are mechanical components, and revenue want car mats to be included under the residuary sub-head "other" in the same list. The HSN Explanatory Notes dealing with interpretation of the Rules specifically exclude "tufted textile carpets, identifiable for use in motor cars" from 87.08 and place them under heading 57.03. Revenue's argument is that the Explanatory Notes have persuasive value only. But the level or quality of such persuasive value is very strong, as observed in the judgments of this Court to which we have already referred. Moreover, the Commissioner himself has referred to the Explanatory Notes in the order- in-original while dealing with the Respondent's stand. Thus, we see no reason as to why we should make a departure from the general trend of taking assistance of these Explanatory Notes to resolve entry related dispute. Now, on referring to these Explanatory Notes, we find that one category of carpets…

decision, its use in meters was in issue. This court held, pertinently, as follows:

not constitute “articles” provided more specifically in other headings. In the present case, it is also not in dispute that LCDs imported by the appellant did not constitute any such “article” which is more specifically provided in other headings. On the contrary, the Revenue wants to include in the same chapter i.e. Chapter 90, though under Entry 9028.90.10 as “parts and accessories”. The only reason for including the goods under Chapter Heading 9028 is that the LCDs were to be used in the electricity supply meters. However, Entry 9028 does not pertain to LCDs but gas, liquid, etc. and includes electricity supply meters as well. Merely because these LCDs are to be used as parts in the said electricity supply meters, can it be said that they are to be included in Entry 9028? Here, Note 2 of this Chapter Notes becomes important since LCDs are used in the electricity supply meters only as parts thereof. Note 2(a) stipulates that parts and accessories which are goods included in the heading of the said chapter i.e. Chapter 90, are to be classified in their respective headings. Going by the plain reading of Note 2(a) it is clear that LCDs, which are goods and are used as parts in the…

Operative decision and relief

set aside the demand, and upheld the assessee’s plea that the proper

Consequently, the appeals have to fail and are dismissed, without order on

The Civil Appeals are dismissed with no order as to costs in

Pending application(s), if any, are disposed of.

Ratio and legal principle

• The packaged judgment addresses Customs classification of imported LCD panels used in televisions/audio products. The precise proposition must be read with the Court/Tribunal's reasoning and operative directions.
• Reliance depends on matching the statutory version, jurisdiction, procedural stage and material evidence recorded in the judgment.

Why this judgment matters

This decision is relevant to practitioners and affected parties dealing with customs classification of imported lcd panels used in televisions/audio products. Its value lies in showing how the adjudicating forum connected the applicable rule to the proved facts and procedural posture.

Practitioner action points

• Match the statutory version, jurisdiction, procedural stage and decisive evidence before relying on the result.
• Verify current appellate, review and SLP history and any later amendment or controlling authority.
• Attach the complete judgment to the working paper or filing and cite the paragraph/page supporting the proposition.

Does this case match your facts?

Section / provision impact

• See the statutory provisions identified in the packaged judgment.

Case network

Similar issue / useful comparison

• State of Gujarat and Anr Vs Saw Pipes Ltd - Supreme Court of India
• Commissioner of Customs ,Central Excise & Service-tax Vs Suzlon Energy Ltd - Supreme Court of India
• State of Jharkhand and others Vs Linde India limited and another - Supreme Court of India

Different outcome / possible distinction

• M/s Thermax Limited Vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune - Operative order controls
• Pr Commissioner of Central Excise, Kolkata- IV Vs Himadri Speciality Chemicals Limited - Operative order controls

Full judgment and source control

Read / download packaged judgment record

Source class: Official primary copy, digitally signed and authenticated · Repository status: Later-history status: verification on hold pending source confirmation