Water Meter Classification: CESTAT Sets Aside Order After Finding Crucial Precedents Were Not Examined [Read Order]
The Tribunal Remanded the Matter to Adjudicating Authority to Reconsider Classification in light of Precedents and ensure Conformity
The Mumbai Bench of the Customs, Excise &Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has set aside an order classifying imported electromagnetic water meters under tariff item 9028 2000 and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication.
The appeal arose from the assessment of a bill of entry for the import of “Ipearl DN 15 Water Meter,” originally classified by the importer under tariff item 9026 1090 of the First Schedule to the CustomsTariff Act, 1975. Revenue reclassified the product under heading 9028 based on HSN Explanatory Notes, catalogues, and National Import Database (NIDB) data from similar imports at Delhi and Chennai.
The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the reclassification on the ground that the meters were intended for billing consumption and not merely for measuring flow, thereby falling outside the exclusion under heading 9026.
The appellant, Xylem Water Solutions India Pvt. Ltd., argued that the functional methodology of the meters aligned with heading 9026 and relied upon decisions in Larsen & Toubro Ltd. and Anjali Enterprises, where the Tribunal had clarified the scope of heading 9028. They also cited the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs’ advisory acknowledging electromagnetic water meters as a distinct category.
Step by Step Handbook for Filing GST Appeals, Click Here
Revenue supported the lower authority’s view and highlighted a U.S. Customs ruling classifying the same product under a heading corresponding to 9028.
The Tribunal Bench, comprising C.J. Mathew (Judicial Member) and Ajay Sharma (Technical Member), noted that the lower authorities did not have the benefit of the Tribunal’s decisions in Larsen & Toubro Ltd. and Anjali Enterprises, which directly address the classification of water meters. Observing that these rulings have a bearing on the issue, the Bench held that a fresh examination was required.
Accordingly, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter to the adjudicating authority to reconsider the classification in light of the precedents and ensure conformity between the goods examined in earlier cases and the meters under dispute.
The appeal was allowed by way of remand.Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
