Photographic Flashlights Producing Short-Duration Light Classifiable as Photographic Equipment, Not as Lamps and Lighting Fittings: CESTAT [Read Order]

The New Delhi Bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) ruled that photographic flashlights producing short-duration light are classifiable as photographic equipment and not as lamps and lighting fittings.

Simpex Industries, the appellant, imported LED photographic lighting equipment during the period from March 2018 to March 2022. The goods were classified by the appellant under the tariff heading for photographic equipment, on which basic customs duty at 10% was paid.

The department disputed this classification and held that the goods should fall under the heading for lamps and lighting fittings, attracting a higher rate of 25%. The department also alleged undervaluation and re-determined the assessable value under the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007.

The Principal Commissioner confirmed the reclassification, enhanced the value, and demanded differential duty with interest and penalties. Aggrieved by the order, the appellant approached the CESTAT.

Understanding Common Mode of Tax Evasion with Practical Scenarios, Click Here

The appellant’s counsel argued that the goods were photographic flashlights used in photography, which produce bright light for a short duration and cannot be treated as permanent lighting fittings.

They pointed out that the same goods had earlier been classified under the photographic equipment heading in two previous orders passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Joint Commissioner, which were accepted by the department. They submitted that the department was bound by those orders and could not take a contrary view.

The department’s counsel supported the impugned order and argued that the goods were continuous lighting equipment and not flashlights, and thus were rightly classifiable as lamps and lighting fittings.

The bench comprising Justice Dilip Gupta (President) and P.V. Subba Rao (Technical Member) observed that the earlier orders in the appellant’s own case had classified identical goods as photographic equipment and had been accepted by the department.

Understanding Common Mode of Tax Evasion with Practical Scenarios, Click Here

The tribunal explained that judicial discipline required the Principal Commissioner to follow those orders and not take a different view. It further observed that the product catalogues and technical details showed that the goods produced bright light for a very short duration and were used for photography, making them photographic flashlights.

The tribunal also referred to the Harmonized System of Nomenclature (HSN) Explanatory Notes, which clarify that photographic flashlights fall under the photographic equipment heading and are excluded from the heading for lamps and lighting fittings.

The tribunal held that the correct classification of the goods was under the tariff heading for photographic equipment and not under the heading for lamps and lighting fittings. The bench thus set aside the reclassification, upheld the declared classification and value, and allowed the appeal.

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates