SC upholds Order which held Child parts included in parts of seat of cars under Heading 9401

Last updated: 14 September 2021

Court :
Supreme Court of India

Brief :
In Commissioner of Central Excise & ST, Ahmedabad v. Shiroki Auto Components India Private Limited [Civil Appeal No. 1623 of 2021 dated July 30, 2021], the current appeal has been filed against Final Order A/11132/2020 in Custom Appeal No 10248 of 2020 by the Hon’ble CESTAT, Ahmedabad wherein it was held that Child Parts imported in order to manufacture "Round Recliners" is classified under CETH 9401 90 00 of Customs Tariff Act, 1975 ("the CT Act") as "parts of motor vehicle seats".

Citation :
Civil Appeal No. 1623 of 2021 dated July 30, 2021

In Commissioner of Central Excise & ST, Ahmedabad v. Shiroki Auto Components India Private Limited [Civil Appeal No. 1623 of 2021 dated July 30, 2021], the current appeal has been filed against Final Order A/11132/2020 in Custom Appeal No 10248 of 2020 by the Hon’ble CESTAT, Ahmedabad wherein it was held that Child Parts imported in order to manufacture "Round Recliners" is classified under CETH 9401 90 00 of Customs Tariff Act, 1975 ("the CT Act") as "parts of motor vehicle seats".

The Department contended the same to be classifiable under Heading 8708 of CTH as parts and accessories of motor vehicles by relying on O.K. Play (India) Limited v. CCE [Delhi – 2005 (180) ELT 300 (SC)] wherein parameters were given on how to classify goods.

The Hon’ble CESTAT Ahmedabad observed that as per HSN Explanatory Notes to Tariff, Item 8708, which provides two Clauses- (i) and (ii), both the conditions prescribed under these Clauses have to be fulfilled. However, in the case at hand, Vehicle Seats have been excluded by the provisions of explanatory notes (II) to Section XVII, therefore, clause (ii) is not fulfilled. Thus, the vehicle seats will not be covered under heading 8708.

Further observed that Motor Vehicle seats are specifically mentioned under heading 9401 which also includes parts of seats, thereby falling under 9401 9000. Also relied on the US Customs Ruling NY R04585 dated August 15, 2006which held the same product to be parts of seats used in motor vehicles.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the present appeal has consequently upheld the order of the CESTAT by dismissing the appeal filed by the Revenue and has concurred with the views of the CESTAT by holding "child"/ "spare" parts imported for assembling Round Recliner to be considered as "parts of seat" of cars under Heading 9401 of the CT Act.