1995 (3) TMI 208 - AT - Customs

Tribunal classifies Mechanical Track wrench as production machine, not residuary item

The Tribunal classified the Mechanical Track wrench under Heading 84.59(2) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, as a machine designed for production, not ... Classification Issues:Classification of Mechanical Track wrench for Crawler Tractor Undercarriage Track Shoes under Customs Tariff Act, 1975 - Heading 84.59(1) or Heading 84.59(2).Analysis:The appellants imported a Mechanical Track wrench and claimed its assessment under Heading 84.59(2) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. However, the Deputy Collector classified the goods under Heading 84.59(1). The Collector (Appeals) upheld this decision, stating that the wrench was meant for repairs, not production. The appellants argued that the wrench was used in the production of Undercarriage Assembly of Crawler Tractors and should be classified under Heading 84.59(2), not the residuary Heading 84.59(1. They cited relevant case laws to support their contention.The Tribunal examined the case to determine the classification of the Mechanical wrench. The Tariff Heading 84.59 distinguishes between machines for production of a commodity and those not specified elsewhere. The manufacturers' catalogue and the process of manufacturing undercarriage assembly submitted by the appellants demonstrated that the wrench was integral to the production process. It was used to tighten bolts with specific torque requirements, essential for assembling the undercarriage of Crawler Tractors. The Tribunal concluded that the wrench fell under Heading 84.59(2) as a machine designed for the production of a commodity, not under the residuary Heading 84.59(1.The Tribunal's decision was supported by a previous case involving an automatic screw driving mechanism used in cassette manufacturing, which was classified under Heading 84.59(2. Therefore, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed in favor of the appellants.