Case Details: L.G. Electronics India Pvt. Ltd. Versus Principal Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi - (2025) 26 Centax 349 (Tri.-Del)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- Dr Rachna Gupta, Member (J) & Mrs Hemambika R. Priya, Member (T)
- Ms Jyoti Pal, Adv., for the Appellant.
- Shri Amitabh Amrit, Authorized Representative, for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The appellant, an importer of the “LG Watch W7,” a smartwatch with features like quartz movement, Bluetooth/Wi-Fi connectivity, and a Google operating system, declared the product under CTH 9102 19 00 as a wristwatch, claiming an exemption under Notification No. 152/2009-Customs. However, the customs department disagreed, classifying the product under CTH 8517 62 90, which covers apparatus for communication in a wired or wireless network, and denied the exemption. The appellant filed an appeal with the Delhi Tribunal, arguing that the product should be classified as a wristwatch due to its physical features, thereby challenging the denial of the exemption and the reclassification.
CESTAT Held
The Hon’ble Tribunal ruled that the “LG Watch W7” could not be classified under CTH 9102 19 00 as a wristwatch. It found that the product’s primary function was as a wearable computing device with features like messaging, calling, and health monitoring, rather than timekeeping. Therefore, the Tribunal classified it under CTH 8517 62 90, as an apparatus for communication in a wired or wireless network, and upheld the denial of the customs duty exemption under Notification No. 152/2009-Customs.
List of Cases Cited
- H.P.L. Chemicals Ltd. v. Commissioner — 2006 (197) E.L.T. 324 (S.C.) — Referred [Para 2]
- Harivishnu Kaamat v. Sayyad Ahmed Issac — 1955 (1) SCR 1104 — Referred [Para 4]
- Honda Siel Power Products Ltd. v. Commissioner — 2008 (9) S.T.R. 117 (S.C.) — Referred [Para 5]
- L.G. Electronics India Pvt. Ltd. v. Principal Commissioner — (2024) 15 Centax 201 (Tri. – Del.) — Referred [Para 1]
- Lewek Altain Shipping Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner – 2019 (366) E.L.T. 318 (Tri.-Hyd.) — Relied on [Para 8]
- Mauri Yeast India Pvt. Ltd. v. State of U.P. — 2008 (225) E.L.T. 321 (S.C.) — Referred [Para 2]
- Saurashtra Chemicals v. Collector — 1986 (23) E.L.T. 283 (Tribunal) — Distinguished [Para 2]
List of Notifications Cited
- Notification No. 151/2009-Cus., dated 31-12-2009 [Paras 2, 3, 6, 7, 8]
- Notification No. 152/2009-Cus., dated 31-12-2009 [Para 2]
