WAPs with MIMO but Without LTE Standards Eligible for Customs Duty Exemption: CESTAT Overrules Dept's Interpretation [Read Order]
CESTAT ruled that WAPs using only MIMO technology, without LTE, qualify for customs duty exemption under pre-2021 notification.
![WAPs with MIMO but Without LTE Standards Eligible for Customs Duty Exemption: CESTAT Overrules Depts Interpretation [Read Order]](https://images.taxscan.in/h-upload/2025/06/18/2049986-site-img-2.webp "WAPs with MIMO but Without LTE Standards Eligible for Customs Duty Exemption: CESTAT Overrules Depts Interpretation [Read Order]")
The Chennai Bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) ruled that Wireless Access Points (WAPs) using MIMO technology but not conforming to LTE standards are eligible for basic customs duty exemption under Notification No. 24/2005-Cus. The tribunal rejected the customs department’s interpretation that WAPs with MIMO alone fall within the scope of exclusion.
Inflow Technologies Pvt. Ltd., the appellant, had imported WAPs between July 2014 and June 2017 and classified them under Customs Tariff Item 8517 6990. The appellant claimed exemption under Serial No. 13 of Notification No. 24/2005, which provides a nil rate of duty for all goods except a few, including "MIMO and LTE products."
Want a deeper insight into the Income Tax Bill, 2025? Click here
The Commissioner of Customs denied the exemption on the ground that the WAPs used MIMO technology, even though they did not conform to LTE standards. The Commissioner held that the exclusion clause in the notification should be read in a disjunctive manner, meaning products using either MIMO or LTE would be excluded from the benefit.
Aggrieved by the order, the appellant’s counsel filed an appeal before the CESTAT. The appellant argued that the wording “MIMO and LTE products” in the notification must be read conjunctively. They relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Commissioner of Customs v. Ingram Micro India Pvt. Ltd., which held that only products that possess both MIMO technology and LTE standard are excluded from the exemption.
The revenue counsel argued that the WAPs fell within the exclusion clause because they used MIMO technology. It relied on an earlier order of the Chennai Bench of the Tribunal and claimed that the interpretation in the Ingram Micro case did not address the classification issue in full.
The two-member bench comprising P. Dinesha (Judicial Member) and M. Ajit Kumar (Technical Member) observed that the use of the word “and” in the phrase “MIMO and LTE products” must be read conjunctively, and not as “MIMO or LTE.” It explained that if the intention was to exclude products with either of the technologies, the notification would have used the word “or” or separated the terms using punctuation.
How to Audit Public Charitable Trusts under the Income Tax Act Click Here
The tribunal referred to the 2021 amendment in the notification that replaced “MIMO and LTE products” with “(i) MIMO products; (ii) LTE products.” It observed that this amendment was clarificatory and applicable only prospectively from February 2, 2021. The earlier version of the notification must be interpreted as excluding only products that feature both technologies together.
The tribunal ruled that the WAPs imported by the appellant, which used only MIMO technology and not LTE, were entitled to duty exemption. It held that the Commissioner’s interpretation was incorrect and set aside the impugned order. The appellant’s appeal was allowed with consequential relief as per law.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscanpremium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
