Rakesh Kumar, Technical Member - The appellants are manufacturers of treadle pumps, which are feet operated pumps, which can lift water from the depth up to 7 Mtrs. and are normally used for minor irrigation purposes for lifting water from beneath or surface water ponds, canals or rivers. The dispute is about classification of this product. According to the Department, the Treadle pumps are classifiable under sub-heading No. 8413.80 of the Tariff as "other pumps for liquids", which according to the appellants, these pumps are meant for minor irrigation purposes and are correctly classifiable as "mechanical appliances of a kind used in agricultural or horticulture" under Heading No. 8424.10 of the Tariff. Vide order-in-original dated 16-1-2004 passed by the jurisdictional Asst. Commissioner, the treadle pumps were classified under Heading 8413.80. The appellant filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) against this decision of the Asstt. Commissioner and the Commissioner (Appeals) vide order-in-appeal dated 22-8-2005 upheld the classification of the treadle pump under sub-heading No. 8413.80. Against this order of the Commissioner, this appeal has been filed.

2. Heard both the sides.

3. Shri R. Krishnan, Advocate, ld. counsel for the appellant, pleaded that there is no dispute that the treadle pumps are meant for use in the irrigation purposes, that these pumps had been exported under bond through a merchant exporter to Africa, that as per technical literature in respect of treadle pumps, which is placed on record, these pumps are meant for minor irrigation purposes for lifting water from depths up to 7 Mtrs. and except for this, there is no other use, of these pumps that since Heading No. 8424.10 covers "mechanical appliances for agricultural or horticulture", and since these goods are meant for agricultural or horticultural use, the same are more specifically covered under 8412, that the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Glaxo Laboratories (India) Ltd. v. Union of India 1985 (21) ELT 72 has held that while the end-use of the goods is irrelevant for classification, it would be relevant when the Tariff Entry itself is end-use based, that the ratio of this judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court is squarely applicable to the facts of this case, that the Tribunal in a series of judgments in the cases of Rungta Irrigation Ltd. v. CCE 2004 (174) ELT 250 (Tri. - Delhi); CCE v. Rungta Irrigation Ltd. ; CCE v. Rungta Irrigation Ltd. 2004 (165) ELT 574 (Tri. - Delhi); Phoel Industries v. CCE and Indian Plastics & Laminates Ltd. v. CCE 2004 (169) ELT 51 (Tri. - Delhi) has held that HDPE Quick change coupler, tail piece, open end cap, bend tee and branch coupler/sprinkler line coupler are classifiable under sub-Heading No. 8424.91 as part of the Sprinkler Irrigation System, that since the pumps, in question, are specifically meant for agricultural or horticultural purposes, the same have to be treated as mechanical appliances for agricultural or horticultural use and would be more specifically covered by 8424.10 rather than the classification as "other pumps for liquids" under Heading No. 8413.80. He, therefore, pleaded that the impugned order classifying the goods as other pumps for liquids is not correct.

4. M.S. Negi, ld. departmental representative, defended the impugned order by reiterating the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) pleaded that Heading 8413 covers "all pumps for liquids, whether or not fitted with a measuring device; liquid elevators", that sub-heading No. 8413.80 covers "pumps other than power driven pumps, primarily designed for handling water" or "hand pumps", that since the goods, in questions are feet operated pumps meant for lifting water, the same are specifically covered by Heading No. 8413.80, that in terms of the General Rules for interpretation of First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff, the Heading which provides the most specific description shall be preferred over the general h