SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

S.L.PEERAN, JEET RAM KAIT
Indchem Instrumentation Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of Customs, Madras – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
S. Anand,A. Jayachandran

ORDER

Per S.L. Peeran : This appeal arises from Order-in-Appeal No. C3/164/98 dated 19.11.1993 passed by Collector of Customs (Appeals), Chennai holding that load-cell are parts and not a complete instrument for the purpose of granting benefit under Notification No. 111/92. He has upheld the grant of benefit of Notification No. 121/92. The revenue has not appealed against the said allowance of the benefit under Notification No. 121/92. The appeal is confined only to rejection of the benefit of Notification No. 111/92. Notification No. 111/92 undisputedly grants benefit only to complete instrument.

2. Counsel Shri S. Anand submits that the load cell by itself is an instrument and benefit should be extended. He relied on the judgment rendered in the case of Collector of Customs, Bombay Vs. New Electronics Industries Ltd. - 1998 (98) ELT 690 wherein load cells are held to be classifiable under Heading 90.31 of the Customs Tariff Act and exempt from auxiliary duty in terms of Notification No. 105/89-Cus dated 1.3.1989.

3. DR on the other hand submits that load cell is a part has been held so by the Special Bench, CEGAT in the case of Larsen Toubro Ltd. Vs. CC - 1991 (56) ELT 823. He sub

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top