Ask Jurishour AI

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
tdb_templates
saswp_reviews
saswp-collections
saswp_rvs_location
tdc-review-email
web-story-font
web-story
googlesitekit_email
tds_locker
tds_email
saswp
mailpoet_page
mailpoet_email
tdcpt_tunes
tdc-review
pronamic_payment
pronamic_gateway
pronamic_pay_subscr
wpcode
HomeIndirect TaxesCESTAT Restores Concessional Customs Duty on MCPCBs Inputs, Rejects Reclassification by Department

CESTAT Restores Concessional Customs Duty on MCPCBs Inputs, Rejects Reclassification by Department

Published on

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

The Delhi Bench of Customs Department, the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has quashed a Commissioner’s order that denied concessional customs duty on aluminium-based copper clad laminates used in manufacturing Metal Clad Printed Circuit Boards (MCPCBs).

The bench of Justice Dilip Gupta (President) and Mr. P.V. Subba Rao (Technical Member) relied on the Tribunal’s earlier rulings in Crompton Greaves Consumer Electricals Ltd, which had held that MCPCBs are indeed PCBs and eligible for the concessional rate. The Supreme Court had also upheld this view in November 2024 by dismissing the Department’s appeal.

The appellant, a manufacturer of Printed Circuit Boards (PCBs), imported aluminium-based copper clad laminates through 23 separate Bills of Entry. They claimed exemption from customs duty under Serial No. 39 of Notification No. 24/2005-Cus dated March 1, 2005, which allows concessional duty for goods used in manufacturing PCBs classifiable under Customs Tariff Item (CTI) 8534 00 00, subject to procedural compliance under the Import of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty Rules, 2017.

However, the Department disputed this classification and instead argued that the imported laminates were more appropriately classifiable under CTI 9405 99 00 — a heading typically covering parts of lighting and fittings — and therefore not eligible for the concessional duty. Accordingly, the Commissioner passed an Order-in-Original dated September 26, 2023, denying the exemption and confirming the demand for differential duty, interest, and penalty.

The core issue in the case was the reclassification of the imported laminates by the Department under Customs Tariff Item (CTI) 9405 99 00, instead of 8534 00 00, thereby disallowing the importer’s claim for exemption under Serial No. 39 of Notification No. 24/2005-Cus. The order had confirmed differential duty, interest, and penalty.

The Tribunal confirmed that composite laminates with metal cores fall under the exemption even if classified under metal-based tariff chapters.

Case Details

Case Title: Arktron Electronics Versus Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) New Customs House

Case No.: Customs Appeal No. 50013 of 2024

Date: 27/06/2025

Counsel For Appellant: Anurag Kapur and Shri Kaushal Jaisalmer, Advocates

Counsel For Respondent: Shankar, Authorised Representative

Mariya Paliwala
Mariya Paliwalahttps://www.jurishour.in/
Mariya is the Senior Editor at Juris Hour. She has 7+ years of experience on covering tax litigation stories from the Supreme Court, High Courts and various tribunals including CESTAT, ITAT, NCLAT, NCLT, etc. Mariya graduated from MLSU Law College, Udaipur (Raj.) with B.A.LL.B. and also holds an LL.M. She started her career as a freelance tax reporter in the leading online legal news companies.

Latest articles

4 Hearing Opportunities By Customs Dept. Satisfy Natural Justice: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has dismissed a writ petition challenging a Customs revisional order...

Consolidated GST SCN Covering Multiple FY Is Not Without Jurisdiction: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has held that the issuance of a consolidated show cause...

Procedural Error in Customs Broker Licence Inquiry Can Be Rectified Through Remand: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has held that a procedural error committed during proceedings for...

More like this

4 Hearing Opportunities By Customs Dept. Satisfy Natural Justice: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has dismissed a writ petition challenging a Customs revisional order...

Consolidated GST SCN Covering Multiple FY Is Not Without Jurisdiction: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has held that the issuance of a consolidated show cause...

Procedural Error in Customs Broker Licence Inquiry Can Be Rectified Through Remand: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has held that a procedural error committed during proceedings for...