M/S. XEROX INDIA LTD. versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, MUMBAI

Citation: [2010] 14 S.C.R. 199 · Decided: 22-11-2010 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: D.K. JAIN · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

[2010] 14 (ADDL.) S.C.R. 199 
MIS. XEROX INDIA LTD. 
v. 
COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, MUMBAI 
(Civil Appeal No. 1583 of 2003) 
r.JOVEMBER 22, 2010 
[D.K. JAIN AND H.L. DATTU, JJ.) 
A 
B 
Customs Tariff Act, 1985 - Chapter Heading 8471.60 
and 8479.89 - Multi-Functional Machines (which include 
printer, scanner and copier) - Classification of - Held: The 
C 
Multi-Functional Machines in question, having printing 
function as the principal function meets the requirement of 
Chapter Note 5(8), 5(C) and 5(0) - Chapter Note 5(E) not 
applicable -
Thus, classifiable under Chapter Heading 
8471.60 and not under 8479.89. 
O 
The question for consideration in the instant appeal 
was whether the Multi-Functional Machines performing 
the functions of printers, fax machines, copier and/or 
scanner, imported by the appellants would be classified 
as Printers in Automatic Inter Processing Machine (ADD) 
under Chapter Heading 8471.60 or the same would fall 
under Chapter Heading 8479.89 (Residual Heading). 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
E 
F 
HELD: The Multi-Functional Machines in question, 
Xerox Regal 5799 has about 85% of its total parts and 
components along with manufacturing cost allocated to 
printing, as does 74% of the Xerox XD155df model. This 
clearly shows that the printing function emerges as the 
G 
principal function and gives the Multi-Functional 
Machines its essential character. Having such a nature, 
it also clearly meets the three-fold requirement of Chapter 
Note 5(8), as it is to be used principally in Automatic Data 
199 
H 
200 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2010] 14 (ADDL.) S.C.R. 
A Processing Machines (ADPM), it is connectable to the 
Central Processing Unit, and it is able to accept data in a 
form (codes or signals) which can be used by the system. 
Further, there would be no application of Chapter Note 
5(E), as the Multi-Functional Machines are presented 
B independently. 
Moreover, 
since 
predominant 
components are relating to printing function, Chapter 
Note 5(0) also becomes relevant which includes printers 
under Heading 84.71. Based on the nature of the 
functions they perform, the Multi-Functional Machines 
c would serve as input and output devices of an ADPM 
(computer) and thus serve as unit of an ADPM, which on 
a reading of chapter note 5(C), clearly classifies them as 
falling under Heading 84. 71.60 of the Customs Tariff Act, 
1985. No case is made out for classification of the goods 
D under the Residuary Heading 84.79.89. Thus the correct 
classification for the imported Multi-Functional Machines 
invorved in this case, namely models Xerox Regal 5799, 
Xerox Workcentre XO 100 and Xerox Workcentre XO 
155df should be under Customs Tariff Chapter heading 
E 84.71.60. (Paras 13, 14 and 15] (209-C-H; 210-A-C] 
F 
MX Software Services Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, 
Mumbai2001 (131) ELT 422 (Tri-Del); Xerox Modicorp Ltd. 
v. Commissionerof Customs, Chennai 2001 (127) ELT 285 
(Tri-Del) - referred to. 
Case Law Reference: 
2001 (131) ELT 422 (Tri-Del) Referred to. 
Para 5 
2001 (127) ELT 285 (Tri-Del) Referred to. 
Para 7 
G 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 
1583 of 2003. 
From the Judgment & Order dated 5.11.2002 of the 
Customs Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate, Tribunal, New 
H Delhi in Appeal No C/30012002-B. 
XEROX INDIA LTD. v. COMMISSIONER OF 
201 
CUSTOMS, MUMBAI 
V. Lakshmi Kumaran, L. Sadri Narayan, Alok Yadav (for 
A 
M.P. Devanath) for the Appellant. 
V. Shekhar, Aruna Gupta, Prasanth B., Naresh Kaushik for 
B.K. Prasad for the Respondent. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
B 
H.L. DATTU, J.1. In this appeal, the only question, that 
arises for our consideration and decision is, whether the Multi-
Functional Machines imported by the appellants fall under 
Chapter Heading 8479.89 (Residual Heading) as claimed by c 
the Revenue or under Chapter Heading 8471.60, as claimed 
by the appellants, under Customs Tariff Act (hereinafter referred 
to as, "the Act"). 
2. The appellants are engaged in the trading of High 
D 
Technology reproduction and Duplicating machines, printers 
and Multi-Functional Machines capable of discharging number 
of functions. During the period March, September and 
November, 1999, the appellants imported Xerox Regal 5799, 
Xerox Work Centre XD100 and Xerox work Centre XD 155df 
respectively and filed Bills of Entry before the Customs Officer. 
The appellants sought classification of these imported 
machines under Sub-Heading 8471.60 of the A

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.