H.R. Syiem, Member (T)

1. The dispute in all these 15 cases is whether the forgings imported by M/s. Motor Industries are to be assessed as parts under the respective heads as claimed by the department or as steel forgings under the forgings head. The Appellate Collector of Customs, Madras in various orders ruled that the steel forgings were mere pieces of forged iron/steel and had no similarity with the finished product except their outward shapes. He also recorded that the imported adjusting pins had to undergo, the process of tumbling, turning, grinding, heat treatment, chromium plating, lapping, etc., after which alone the finished product could be fitted in the governor. Minor faults in such sensitive parts would lead to their rejection and so he concluded that the finished items had no resemblance with the rough blanks imported. He, therefore, decreed that the rough forgings did not have the essential characteristics of the finished items and would not attract the provision of Rule 2(a) of the Rules for the Interpretation of the First Schedule of the Customs Tariff of 1975. He assessed the goods under Heading 73.33/40 with Notification No. 254/76-Cus. as more appropriate,