Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Mumbai
Commissioner Of Customs vs Multronics Pvt. Ltd. on 7 March, 2001
Equivalent citations: 2001(133)ELT144(TRI-MUMBAI)
ORDER J.H. Joglekar, Member (T)
1. The facts involved in this appeal are as under : - The respondents imported "Video Games" classifying them under sub-heading 9504.90 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, and claiming clearance thereof under SIL. The Assistant Commissioner held that they were appropriately classifiable under sub-heading 9504.90 and that the licence did not cover this sub-heading. In this belief he confiscated the goods, imposed a fine for their redemption and also imposed a penalty on the importers. The Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) relying upon the sub-notes in the HSN found that the appropriate classification as was claimed by the importers. On his setting aside the lower order and allowing the appeal, the present appeal has been filed by the Revenue.
2. We have heard Smt. Reena Arya for the Revenue and Shri S.P. Mathew for the respondents.
3. The various contentions made in the appeal memorandum are the reiteration of the statements Assistant Collector.
4. The contesting Tariff Entries read as under :
95.04 Articles for Funfair, Table or Parlour Games, including Pin-tables, Billiards, Special Tables for Casino Games and Automatic Bowling Alley Equipment.
9504.10 - Video games of a kind used with a television receiver 9504.90 - Other The sub-notes to this heading includes the following:
(2) Video games (used with a television receiver or having a self-contained screen) and other games of skill or chance with an electronic display.
6. The sub-notes thus amplify the scope of entry at 9504.10 and do not limit the scope to a game which requires a television receiver for it to be played, but brings into it habit any game that has a printed screen. The Commissioner (Appeals) examined the contested product and held :
"I find from the sample that it is a video game with the self contained screen and image comes on the screen."
7. Smt. Reena Arya submitted that the sub-note referred to above need not be linked with the sub-heading as claimed by the importer. We do not see any other sub-heading to which it would relate. The wording of the sub-heading and wording of the sub-note bring out the alignment between these two.
8. We find that the Commissioner (Appeals) was correct in approving the classification under Heading 9504.10.
9. The Appendix XXXV, in entry at serial No. 15 reads as under : "Electronic games/toys under Customs Heading 9503.20 and 9504.10."
10. In the face of a licence covering these goods in terms of this annexure, the goods are permissible imports even though they are consumer goods.
11. The proceedings also indicated the existence of a letter No. DRO095-96/PRO Policy, dated 29-6-1995 from the DGFT to the effect that the assessees' claim as to the importability was correct. Copy of this letter has not been furnished by the appellants.
12. In the result we find that the classification as adopted by the Commissioner was correct and consequently the finding as to the importability cannot be faulted. The appeal does not succeed and is dismissed.