1. Import of carbon seal rings — Dispute over classification under Customs Tariff. (Para 1 )
Back
Next 
1997 Supreme(SC) 1271
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
B.N.Kirpal : S.C.Agrawal
Saurashtra Chemicals
Versus
Collector Of Customs
Case No. : 5406 , 5407 of 1985
Date of Decision : 9/25/97
The court will not interfere with a tribunal's decision under Article 136 of the Constitution unless the judgment suffers from an error that warrants such interference.
Headnote:(A) Customs Tariff - Headings 68.01/16 and 84.65 - Constitution of India - Article 136 - Classification of imported goods - Carbon seal rings imported for use in spare parts for turbo sets and compressors - Dispute over classification between Heading 68.01/16 and Heading 84.65 - Tribunal majority held classification under Heading 68.01/16 - Court found no error in the majority judgment warranting interference under Article 136. (Paras 1, 2)
Facts of the case:
Carbon seal rings were imported for use in spare parts for turbo sets and compressors in a cement factory. The Revenue claimed the goods were classifiable under Heading 68.01/16 of the Customs Tariff, whereas the importer claimed they fell under Heading 84.65. The Appellate Tribunal reached a split decision, with the majority ruling in favor of the Revenue.
Findings of Court:
The judgment of the majority of the Tribunal does not suffer from any error which may call for interference by the court under Article 136 of the Constitution.
Issues: Whether the carbon seal rings imported for use in turbo sets and compressors are classifiable under Heading 68.01/16 or Heading 84.65 of the Customs Tariff.
Ratio Decidendi: The court will not interfere with the findings of a tribunal under Article 136 of the Constitution unless the judgment is afflicted by an error that necessitates such intervention.
Result: Appeals dismissed.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Classification of carbon seal rings — Revenue claims Heading 68.01/16 — Appellant claims Heading 84.65. (Para 1 )
3. Majority judgment of the tribunal — No error warranting interference under Article 136 of the Constitution. (Para 2 )
4. Absence of error in a tribunal's majority judgment precludes interference by the court under Article 136 of the Constitution. (Para 2 )
5. Appeals dismissed — No orders as to costs. (Para 2 )
6. Under what circumstances will the court interfere with a tribunal's judgment under Article 136 of the Constitution?
The court will interfere under Article 136 of the Constitution only if the judgment of the tribunal suffers from an error that calls for such interference. (Para 2 )
(1) THESE aPPEALS are directed against the judgment of the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate tribunal dated 26/8/1985 whereby carbon seal rings imported by the appellant for the purpose of use in the spare parts for turbo sets and compressors in the cement factory of the appellant were held to be classifiable under Heading 68.01/16 of the Customs Tariff as claimed by the Revenue and not under Heading 84.65 as claimed by the appellant. In the tribunal there was difference of opinion. The Vice-President and two members decided against the appellant while two members decided in favour of the appellant.
(2) WE have perused the judgment of the majority. We are of the view that the judgment of the majority does not suffer from any error which may call for interference by this court under Article 136 of the Constitution. The appeals are, therefore, dismissed. No orders as to costs.
