Per Dr. Chittaranjan Satapathy : Heard both sides.

2. The appellants received a Purchase Order from M/s. BHEL for manufacturing and supply of Turbine Integral Piping Nine Systems, the details of which are in the Purchase Order dated 21.11.94. This Purchase Order gives specification for two of such Systems. It is the case of the appellants that they have supplied the impugned goods against this Purchase Order and hence, it is their submission that the goods which have been supplied should be treated as two integrated auxiliary plants for boilers and they may be extended the lower rate of duty @ 10% under sub-heading 8404.10. The Department, however, held the impugned goods supplied by the appellants as parts of auxiliary plants and classified the same under sub-heading 8404.90 chargeable to duty @ 15% and hence, has confirmed the differential duty-demand on the appellants under the impugned Order.

3. Shri C.R. Das, learned Advocate appearing for the appellants states that the two integrated auxiliary plants for which the Purchase Order was placed with the appellants were very big in size and therefore, those could not have been supplied in one consignment and therefore, the same