The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Ahemdabad has dismissed the appeal of the customs dept. Appeal On Classification Of Spectrophotometer And Twin Vision Scanner Under Ceramic Industry.
This appeal has been filed by Revenue against the order of Commissioner (Appeals) modifying the classification made by the original Adjudicating Authority.
This classification sought by the respondents was changed by the assessing officer, resulting in a payment of duty of Rs. 10,13,647/-. The Respondents requested the assessing officer to pass a speaking order, but no speaking order was passed. Therefore, the respondents challenged the assessment made on the bill of entry before Commissioner (Appeals). The respondents produced Chartered Engineer certificate.
The Commissioner (appeals) allowed the appeal of the respondents and accepted the classification sought by them, in respect of Eye One Basic Pro EOBAS(spectrophotometer) Equipment for use in ceramic industry, Twin vision scanner spectral dedicated for color management for digital printing support, Ink Tester (for use in ceramic industry) and Analyzer mastersizer (for use in ceramic industry).
However in respect of item no 4 in the assessment order of Analyzer mastersizer (for use in ceramic industry) the original Adjudication Authority was upheld. Aggrieved by the order revenue has filed appeal before the Tribunal challenge the reclassification done by the Commissioner (Appeals). The respondents have filed cross objection, seeking to challenge the order of Commissioner (Appeals) in respect.
From the function of the Spectrophotometer described in the Chartered Engineer certificate, it is seen that the same is used to exactly measure property of colors. It is common knowledge that the radiation imitated by the Colors is in the optical range and therefore the objection raised by the revenue that Commissioner (Appeals) should have first verified if the instrument analyses optical radiation is totally misplaced.
The second item under dispute is ‘Twin vision scanner’. The appellant had sought to classify this item under Heading 84716050. However, revenue has sought classification under Heading 84439990.
The Commissioner (Appeals) has observed that these goods in the nature of scanner and therefore classifiable under Heading 84716050. He has observed that these goods provide input to another machine loaded with software “Twin vision and color profiler” to hold elaboration of spectral or graphic files. The revenue has changed this classification on the ground that the said goods are not part of data processing unit and they do not perform any function of data processing unit. It has been argued that even if it is assumed that the item is scanner providing input to another machine loaded with software which is thereafter used as input for printing on files or other objects, these goods do not classify as data processing machine.
The tribunal held that Chartered Engineer has clearly stated these goods measure the intensity of the color distribution at different wave lengthy for every measured point. It is not in dispute that this data is obtained in digital form. As the equipment converts color data into digital data. The very function of converting color data to digital data in itself is a data processing function.
Case Title: C.C.-Ahmedabad versus Smaltochimia India Pvt Ltd
Citation: CUSTOMS Appeal No. 12797 of 2014-DB