ORDER

1. This batch of appeals (except Civil Appeals Nos. 2023-44 of 1988 and 670-76 of 1987) are preferred by the Revenue against the various judgments of the Tribunals. Civil Appeals Nos. 2023-44 of 1988 and Civil Appeals Nos. 670-76 of 1987 are preferred by the assessees. We shall first take up the appeals preferred by the Revenue.

2. The respondents who are engaged in printing and publishing of newspapers and news magazines imported, what they called, "printing plates" for the purpose of their business. A dispute arose as to the classification of the said goods. The Assistant Collector took the view that these goods fell under Chapter 37.01/08 of the Customs Tariff whereas the respondents/assessees case was that they were properly classifiable under Chapter 84 - Chapter Heading 84.34. The Assistant Collector and the Appellate Collector held against the respondents while the Tribunal allowed the appeals preferred by the respondents-assessees agreeing with their contention that the said goods are properly classifiable under Chapter 84 i.e. Chapter Heading 84.34.

3. For deciding the question of classification, we must first know what these goods are. With a view to ascertain the same, the Tribunal thought it proper to direct the parties to go and inspect certain printing establishments and submit an agreed statement of facts as to the nature and character of the goods in question. Accordingly, a team consisting of Shri Ravinder Bhatt, Advocate for the assessees, Shri J. Gopinath and Shri A. S. Sundar Rajan representing the Revenue, visited the Times of India and the Patriot printing presses situated in New Delhi. They, however, found that these two establishments were no longer using the goods in question, namely, Toyobo photosensitive nylon printing plates. They found that the Times of India press was using the photosensitive plate which is backed by a steel sheet. The team found that but for the difference in the backing material, the said photosensitive plate backed by steel sheet is no different in substance from the photosensitive nylon printing plate. They then set out the nature, character and functioning of the said plates in the following words :

"This photosensitive plate with steel backing is subjected to two exposures to ultraviolet rays which results in transfer of the film negative matter to the photosensitive plate. At this stage there is no physical change in the sensitive plate except the exposure which results in the light transmission only. However, the sensitive plate is non-sensitised. This exposed plate is further subjected to chemical processing in nylon washout unit which results in physical images coming in the form of relief on the plate. The plate which has the relief character is directly taken on the printing machine which is actually used for printing of the newspaper. In the photosensitive nylon printing plate used by M/s Kasturi & Sons, the same process is said to have been adopted except that in place of steel mounting/backing in the case of Times of India, they are using certain adhesive type of tapes to position the printing plate on the rotary machine."

On the basis of the above material, the Tribunal held that the printing plates in question are used exclusively for printing purpose though it may be that their use involves photographic principle. They also recorded a finding that in commercial or common parlance these printing plates are dealt with and are known as printing plates and not photographic plates or films. They also referred to the fact that at the time of their clearance they were described as printing plates and not as photographic plates or films.

4. Dr. Gauri Shankar Murthi, learned counsel for the appellant-Revenue, submitted that the end use of the goods is not relevant in the matter of determining the classification. According to him what is relevant is the nature and character of the goods and if they have a scientific nomenclature, the scientific literature in their be