Case Details: Fiberhome India Pvt. Ltd. vs. Principal Commissioner of Customs, Delhi (2026) 42 Centax 199 (Tri.-Del)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
-
- Justice Dilip Gupta, President & Shri P.V. Subba Rao, Member (T)
- S/Shri Arjun Raghvendra M., Aditya Dhull, Jayant Kumar, Aditya Sarin & Ms Manjunath, Advs., for the Appellant.
- S/Shri Mihir Ranjan, Special Counsel & Manish Kumar Shukla, Authorised Representative, of the Department.
Facts of the Case
The appellant manufacturer of Optical Transport Network (OTN) equipment imported Populated/Loaded/Printed Circuit Board cards and classified the same under CTI 8517 70 10 on the ground that these imported PCB cards are used as parts of OTN equipment. The appellant also imported modules, other than PCBs, which were claimed to be used as parts of OTN equipment and were classified under CTI 8517 70 90. The department classified the cards and modules imported by the appellant as apparatus/machine/equipment under CTI 8517 62 90. It was stated that the OTN equipment has different sub-racks and that each of these sub-racks has a ‘card area’ with slots for different cards, with each slot designed for a particular kind of card, and that such positioning is not interchangeable. The matter was accordingly placed before the CESTAT.
CESTAT Held
The CESTAT held that the cards and modules imported by the appellant are required to be inserted into their designated slots in the OTN equipment to achieve any functional capability. It held that the cards and modules derive their operational capability exclusively from integration with the main machine, i.e. OTN. The Tribunal held that the cards and modules would be classified as ‘parts’. Accordingly, it was held that Populated/Loaded/Printed Circuit Boards (PCB) cards are correctly classifiable under Tariff Item 8517 70 90 and not under Tariff Item 8517 62 90 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975.
List of Cases Cited
-
- Ciena Communications India Pvt. Ltd. v. Principal Commissioner — (2024) 22 Centax 518 (Tri.-Bom) — Relied on [Paras 12, 19]
- Commissioner v. N.I. System (India) P. Ltd. — 2010 (256) E.L.T. 173 (SC) — Relied on [Para 18]
- Commissioner v. Reliance Jio Infocomm Ltd. — (2023) 3 Centax 96 (Tri. – Mumbai) — Relied on [Paras 12, 19, 20]
- Commissioner v. Reliance Jio Infocomm Ltd. — (2025) 29 Centax 337 (Tri. – Mum.) — Relied on [Para 21]
- Vodafone Idea Limited v. Principal Commissioner — (2025) 27 Centax 100 (Tri.Del) — Relied on [Paras 9, 10, 11, 12, 22, 23, 25]
- Vodafone Idea Limited v. Principal Commissioner — (2025) 28 Centax 387 (Tri.-Del) — Referred [Para 12]
