TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal rules Trident II Printing Press is classifiable under Customs Tariff Act</h1> <h3>COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, BOMBAY Versus APPLETREE FOUNDATION WEAR</h3> COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, BOMBAY Versus APPLETREE FOUNDATION WEAR - 2004 (175) E.L.T. 728 (Tri. - Del.) Issues:Classification of imported machine under Heading 84.40(1) or 84.59(1) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975.Detailed Analysis:The appeal pertains to the classification of a machine imported by M/s. Appletree Foundation Wear, Ludhiana, described as Trident II Automatic fusing/Transfer Printing Press. The Collector of Customs, Bombay, initially assessed the machine under Heading 84.59(1) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The respondents appealed this assessment before the Collector of Customs (Appeals), Bombay, who allowed the appeal and directed the assessment under Heading 84.40(1) with consequential relief to the appellants.The key contention raised by the ld. SDR, Shri K.K. Jha, was that the machine in question, used for transferring images from motifs to cloth/garment, did not fall under the category of a printing machine as envisaged in Heading 84.40 CTA, 1975. The SDR relied on a Tribunal decision in a similar case to support the argument that only machines typically used in the printing industry for printing with printing ink could be classified under the heading for printing machinery. The respondents claimed that the machine was a hot press machine designed for fusing collars and cuffs in garments and transferring designs by a heat process, emphasizing that it was not a printing machine.Upon careful consideration, the Tribunal analyzed the competing tariff Headings, i.e., 84.40(1) and 84.59(1) of the CTA. The machine's product literature indicated its capability for fusing garments and transfer printing on them. Chapter Note 5 of Chapter 84 CTA was deemed relevant, stating that a machine used for more than one purpose should be classified based on its principal purpose. Since the machine was equally efficient for fusing and transfer printing, neither could be considered its principal purpose. Therefore, as per the Chapter Note, the machine was classifiable under Heading 84.59(1) CTA. Additionally, the Department's understanding classified transfer printing machines under the same heading, further supporting the classification decision.In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the Assistant Collector's assessment under Heading 84.59(1) CTA, setting aside the Collector (Appeals)'s order and allowing the appeal filed by the Collector of Customs, Bombay, regarding the classification of the Trident II Automatic fusing/Transfer Printing Press imported by M/s. Appletree Foundation Wear, Ludhiana.
TaxTMI 