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

CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND GOLD (CONTROL) APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI
S.D. JHA, A.J.F. D’Souza, I.J. Rao, JJ.
SAIL -Appellant
Versus
Collector of Customs, Calcutta -Respondent
Appeal No. CD (SB)(T) 474 of 1980 Order No. B-651 of 1983, 474 of 1980, 651 of 1983
Decided On : 11-07-1983

Advocates Appeared:
S.K. Srivastav,K.K. Ajwani

ORDER

1. The Revision Application dated 12.3.1980 against order No. 2144/77 dated 21.8.1979 of the Appellate Collector of Customs, Calcutta has been transferred to the Tribunal by the Government of India, for disposal under the provisions of Sec. 131B(2) of the Customs Act, 1962. A consignment of Packing Type G8F2 without Flange and Guide bushing, Packing rings of PTFe with back-up rings, packing cups of Stainless steel 13 mm rods being spares for Synthesis Gas Compressor was assessed to duty under T.I. 84.64 under B/E No. DI 566 dated 25.9.1977. A claim for refund on the grounds that the goods were assessable under heading 84.11(1) instead of 84.64 was rejected by the Asstt. Collector of Customs because the catalogue and past evidence, called for, was not furnished. Their appeal that these packings are essential parts of gas compressor classifiable under heading 84.11 applicable to the compressor was also rejected, on the ground that the "Technical note submitted with the appeal clarified that these are for lubricating valve on the lubricating lines to lubricate the moving parts of compressor. The general principle that recognizable specialized parts of the goods falling in heading as the machine does not apply to parts of the goods falling in heading 84.64 as per section and chapter notes of BTN. The subject goods being covered by heading 84.64 cannot be classified under heading 84.11."

2. In the present appeal it is stated that the technical write up clearly shows that these packings are parts of Demag Compressor in Ammonia Plant. These are made of special bronze to withstand pressure of 675 Kg./cm.2 They are not ordinary packings covered by heading 84.64 which applies to joints of metal sheet combined with other material. They therefore, request that the impugned order be set aside and refund of Rs. 60,586.56 charged in excess be ordered to be refunded.

3. We heard Shri S.K. Srivastav, Dy. Manager, who reiterated these grounds. He referred in particular to Note 2(b) to Section XVI of the I.C.T. which states that other parts if suitable for use solely or principally with a particular kind of machine are to be classified with machines of that kind. The technical write-up and the catalogues mentioned the part numbers which have been also specified in the invoice, will clearly show that these are spare parts essential for the function of the gas compressor in the Ammonia plant. A certificate from KRANZ to this effect has also been filed. They should, therefore, be assessed under heading 84.11.

4. Shri Ajwani drew the Tribunal's attention to heading 84.64 which covers gaskets and similar joints of metal sheeting, combined with other material which also refers to similar joints, dissimilar in composition for insurance pipes, tubes and the like put up in envelopes or similar packings, the subject goods have been described as "Packing type G8F2 Dr" and unless heading 84.64 was ruled out, assessment under heading 84.11 applicable to gas compressors would not be permissible. We observe that no documents had been submitted initially and the Appellate Collector has held that these goods are for lubricating valve on the lubricating lines to lubricate the moving parts of compressor, whereas the appellants contend that these are parts for DEMAG compressor on the lubricating lines to lubricate the moving parts of the compressor. It appears to us that a de novo examination of the matter with reference to the documentation and the averments of the appellants would be warranted in the circumstances of this case. We, therefore, set aside the order of the Appellate Collector and refer the case back to the Assistant Collector for a fresh examination and decision. As this is a very old case the matter may be disposed of within a period of four months from the date of this order.

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top