Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Skylark Electronics Private Limited vs -Kolkata(Port) on 28 November, 2025
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
EASTERN ZONAL BENCH: KOLKATA
REGIONAL BENCH - COURT NO. 2
Customs Appeal No. 75400 of 2021
(Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. KOL/CUS(Port)/AKR/111-112/2021 dated
29.01.2021 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) 3rd Floor, Custom
House, 15/1, Strand Road, Kolkata-700001)
M/s. Skylark Electronics Pvt. Ltd., : Appellant
2, Temple Road, Kolkata-700072
VERSUS
Commissioner of Customs, : Respondent
3rd Floor, Custom House, 15/1, Strand Road,
Kolkata-700001
AND
Customs Appeal No. 75401 of 2021
(Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. KOL/CUS(Port)/AKR/111-112/2021 dated
29.01.2021 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) 3rd Floor, Custom
House, 15/1, Strand Road, Kolkata-700001)
Shri Sailesh Badiani, Director of : Appellant
M/s. Skylark Electronics Pvt. Ltd.,
2, Temple Road, Kolkata-700072
VERSUS
Commissioner of Customs, : Respondent
3rd Floor, Custom House, 15/1, Strand Road,
Kolkata-700001
APPEARANCE:
Shri Nilotpal Chowdhury, Advocate for the Appellants
Shri S. Debnath, Authorized Representative for the Respondent
CORAM:
HON'BLE SHRI R. MURALIDHAR, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)
HON'BLE SHRI K. ANPAZHAKAN, MEMBER (TECHNICAL)
FINAL ORDER NOs.77809-77810/2025
DATE OF HEARING / DECISION: 28.11.2025
Order: [PER SHRI R. MURALIDHAR]
M/s. Skylark Electronics Private Limited and Shri
Sailesh Badiani, Director of the company have filed
Page 2 of 9
Appeal No.: C/75400-75401/2021-DB
separate appeals against the Order-in-Appeal No.
KOL/CUS(Port)/AKR/111-112/2021 dated
29.01.2021 passed by the Commissioner of Customs
(Appeals) 3rd Floor, Custom House, 15/1, Strand
Road, Kolkata-700001.
1.1. The issue involved being common, both these
appeals are taken up together for disposal by way of
a common order.
1.2. The brief facts of the case are that on the basis
of specific information received from the Directorate
of revenue Intelligence, Chennai Zonal Unit that
audio/music systems with in-built USB/SD/FM/MP3
features were being imported into India in the guise
of Multimedia Speaker/ Computer speaker by
misclassifying them under Customs tariff Heading
(CTH) 851822/851829 instead of under CTH
8519/8527 leading to evasion of Customs Duties in
the form of Additional Duty of Customs (CVD) on
Retail Sale Price (RSP) basis.
1.3. One such importer, M/s. Skylark Electronics
Pvt. Ltd. was found to be involved into import of
such goods and it was observed that during the
period of 2012-13 (18.05.2012) το 2013-14
(09.12.2013), they imported and cleared 39 Bills of
Entry including 3(three) live Bills of Entry bearing
No. 2035076 dated 04.05.2013.
1.4. Multimedia Speakers were a set of speakers
consisting of one Sub-woofer and 2-5 satellite
speakers containing amplifier which amplifies the
sound and the satellite speakers were meant for
surround effect. On physical verification, it was
further observed that such audio/music systems
Page 3 of 9
Appeal No.: C/75400-75401/2021-DB
were capable of reproducing sound and adequately
reproduce a wide range of frequencies; they mostly
employed more than one driver, were accompanied
by sophisticated remote control with user friendly
interactive interface; contained Printed Circuit
Boards PCBs) capable of retrieving and reproducing
audio files of MP3/WPMA formats stored on USB
memory devices incorporated with in-built amplifier
and various terminals that allow for connectivity to
external audio sources such as CD players, DVD
players, etc.
1.5. M/s. Skylark Electronics Pvt. Ltd. also did not
declare the correct RSP/MRP in their impugned Bills
of Entry with the intention to evade payment of
proper duty on the good, wherein the values were
applied for CVD calculation in case of
contemporaneous Bills of Entry. The non-declared,
suppressed/reduced MRP/RSP is therefore liable to
be set aside, as have been applied for determining
the RSP/MRP of those models imported in those
financial years for which importer did not submit the
Price List to DRI (As determined in the Annexures to
the corresponding Show Cause Notice).
1.6. It was alleged that M/s. Skylark Electronics
Pvt. Ltd. also did not declare the correct RSP/MRP in
their impugned Bills of Entry with the intention to
evade payment of proper duty on the good, wherein
the values were applied for CVD calculation in case
of contemporaneous Bills of Entry. The non-declared,
suppressed/reduced MRP/RSP is therefore liable to
be set aside, as have been applied for determining
the RSP/MRP of those models imported in those
financial years for which importer did not submit the
Page 4 of 9
Appeal No.: C/75400-75401/2021-DB
Price List to DRI (As determined in the Annexures to
the corresponding Show Cause Notice).
1.7. Thereafter, the case was adjudicated by the
Additional Commissioner of Customs (Port), Custom
House, Kolkata vide Order-in-Original No.
KOL/CUS/ADC/ADJN (PORT)/06/2018 dated
09.01.2018 wherein the adjudicating authority
ordered for re-assessment / re-determination of CVD
on the goods imported under Customs Tariff Heading
No. 85279100. Accordingly, he Ordered for
confiscation of the goods covered under Bills of Entry
bearing No. 2035076 dated 04.05.2013, 2810938
dated 25.07.2013 & 2778608 dated 23.07.2013
having assessable value of Rs 21,75,932 / under
Section 111(m) and Section 111(d) of the Customs
Act, 1962 read with Section 3(3) of the Foreign
Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 and
Rule 11 of Foreign Trade (Regulations) Rules, 1993.
However, in lieu of confiscation, gave the option to
redeem the goods on payment of Redemption fine of
Rs. 5,00,000/-(Rupees Five Lakh only) under Section
125 of the Customs Act 1962.
1.8. The adjudicating authority also imposed
penalties, inter alia, on M/s. Skylark Electronics Pvt.
Ltd. as well as their Director, namely, Shri Sailesh
Badiani (the appellants herein) under the provisions
fo Section 114A, 114AA and 112(a) of the Customs
Act, 1962.
1.9. The above order dated 09.01.2018 was
challenged by the appellants before the Ld.
Commissioner (Appeals), who vide the order
impugned herein has rejected their appeals.
Page 5 of 9
Appeal No.: C/75400-75401/2021-DB
1.10. Aggrieved, the appellants are before the
Tribunal.
2. During the course of hearing, the Ld. Counsel
appearing on behalf of the appellants has submitted
that the issue of classification of the Multimedia
Speakers is no longer res integra, as the
classification of the said goods under the CTH 8518
has been upheld by various Tribunals and the said
decisions have been affirmed by the Hon'ble High
Courts. He cited the decision of this Tribunal in the
case of M/s. Jupiter Green Energy Pvt. Ltd. v.
Commissioner of Customs (Port), Kolkata [Final
Order No. 76550 of 2025 dated 11.06.2025 in
Customs Appeal No. 76843 of 2018 - CESTAT,
Kolkata], wherein this Tribunal has upheld the
classification of Multimedia Speakers under the CTH
8518. Accordingly, he has prayed for setting aside
the impugned order and allow their appeals, with
consequential relief.
3. The Ld. Authorized Representative
representing the Revenue reiterated the findings in
the impugned order.
4. Heard both sides, perused the appeal papers
and the documentary evidence placed before us.
5. Having considered the submissions made by
both the sides, we find that the issue of classification
of the impugned goods viz., Multimedia speakers, is
no longer res integra, as the classification of the said
goods under the CTH 8518 has been upheld by
various Tribunals and the said decisions have been
affirmed by the Hon'ble High Courts. In support of
this view, we refer to the decision of this Tribunal in
Page 6 of 9
Appeal No.: C/75400-75401/2021-DB
the case of M/s. Jupiter Green Energy Pvt. Ltd. v.
Commissioner of Customs (Port), Kolkata [Final
Order No. 76550 of 2025 dated 11.06.2025 in
Customs Appeal No. 76843 of 2018 - CESTAT,
Kolkata], wherein in it has been held as under: -
"11. With regard to the first issue, we find that an
identical issue had come up before this Tribunal in
the appellant's own cases. In M/s. Jupiter
International Limited vs Commissioner of Customs
(Port), Kolkata [2025 (2) TMI 430 - CESTAT
Kolkata], under similar facts and circumstances, it
has been observed as under: -
"The appellant, Jupiter International Ltd
imported a consignment of Two models of
Multimedia Speakers having additional
function such as Blue
tooth/SD/MMC/USB/FM/AUX with remote
wireless Microphone and some electronic
spare parts of speakers. They have filed a
Bill of Entry No. 7866965 dated 01.09.2018
self assessing the Multimedia Speakers
under heading no.85182200. They imported
another consignment of various models of
Multimedia Speakers comprising of three
categories of speakers i.e. (i) Multimedia
Speakers with additional function of
Bluetooth and FM radio, (ii) Multimedia
Speakers with additional function of USB and
(ii) samples of Multimedia Speakers without
any additional function.....
...
8. We find that this issue was before the Banglore Tribunal in the case of Logic India Trading Co-v-C.C-2016(337) ELT 65(Tri- Bang). The Tribunal has held as under:
...
9. We find that the same issue was dealt by this Bench in the case of B.C. (Port), Kolkata
-v- M/s Santosh Radio Products (order no. F/O 76070/2018 dated 04.05.2018- (Tribunal-Kol)], wherein it has been held as under:
Page 7 of 9Appeal No.: C/75400-75401/2021-DB ...
10. After going through the factual matrix, we find that the case laws cited above are squarely applicable. Hence, applying the cited case laws, we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeal."
11.1. Further, in the appellant's own case in M/s. Jupiter International Limited vs Commissioner of Customs (Port), Kolkata vide Final Order Nos. 75404-75405 of 2025 dated 05.02.2025 in Customs Appeal Nos. 75580 & 75581 of 2020 (CESTAT, Kolkata), this Tribunal has held as under:
-
"1. The appellant has imported Multimedia Speakers/Computer Speakers on 11.01.2018 classifying the said goods under CTH 85182200. The department proposed classification of the product under CTH 8519/8527 attracting CVD on retail sale price basis. The Adjudicating authority vide O-I-O dated 13.02.2018 determined the classification of the imported goods under 85279100. Being aggrieved the appellant filed their appeal before Commissioner (Appeals), which come to be dismissed. Hence, the appellant is before the Tribunal.
2. We find that the aforesaid, question of classification of the said products has been examined in extenso and the rival entries discussed threadbare. The subject issue is no more res integra. There are a catena of decisions holding the classification of the impugned goods under heading under CTH- 8518. In the case of Logic India Trading Company US Commissioner of Customs, Cochin (2016(337)ELT 65(Tr-Bang.), as maintained by the Hon'ble Apex Court, reported in 2016(342)ELT A-34(SC), while dealing with similar set of facts, the courts have held the classification of the said goods under CTH 8518. Relevant paras of the said decision are referred to hereunder below:
....Page 8 of 9
Appeal No.: C/75400-75401/2021-DB
6. The detailed analysis of the classification of all such Audio-Visual Receivers was also undertaken independently by this Tribunal in the case of ONKYO SIGHT & SOUND INDIA PVT.LTD. vs Commissioner of Customs, Chennai (2019(368) ELT 683(Tri- Chen.), wherein too the Southern Regional Bench of the Tribunal did not agree with the department's stance for classification of the said products under CTH 8527 and had retained the CTH 8518 claiming the goods as Audio Frequency Amplifier along with Home Theatre Systems as multiple loudspeakers mounted in the same enclosure.
7. In view of said matter having been examined ad nauseam as referred supra, we find no merit in the order of the lower authority which is therefore set aside.
8. The appeal filed by the appellant is hereby allowed with consequential relief, if any, as per law."
11.2. Thus, we find that the issue is no longer res integra as the same has already been dealt with by this Tribunal in the above cited cases. Therefore, following the above judicial precedents, we hold that the appellant has rightly classified the multimedia speakers with added ancillary features of USB/SD card/ MMC Playback and/ or FM radio under CTH 8518. Accordingly, the demands confirmed against the appellant by reclassifying the said goods under CTH 8527/CTH 8519 are not sustainable and therefore, we set aside the same."
5.1. We find that a similar issue was once again analysed by this Tribunal in the case of Santosh Radio Products vs. Commissioner of Customs (Port) [Final Order No. 77648-77649 / 2025 dated 30.10.2025] wherein, by relying on the decision in Jupiter Green Energy Pvt. Ltd. (supra), the Tribunal has set aside the re-classification of similar goods under CTH 85279100 by the Revenue.
Page 9 of 9Appeal No.: C/75400-75401/2021-DB 5.2. By following the ratio of the decision cited above, we hold that the appellant-company has rightly classified the Multimedia Speakers in question, imported by them, under Chapter Heading 8518, where MRP based price is not applicable. Thus, we do not find any merit in the reclassification of the goods under the CTH 85279100 by the Revenue and accordingly, the same is set aside. The consequent demands, along with interest and penalties, as confirmed against the appellants, are also therefore set aside.
6. In the result, we set aside the impugned order and allow the appeals filed by the appellants. The appellants shall be eligible for consequential relief, if any, as per law.
(Operative part of Order was pronounced in Open court) (R. MURALIDHAR) MEMBER (JUDICIAL) (K. ANPAZHAKAN) MEMBER (TECHNICAL) rkp