Customs Order Set Aside, Case Remanded for Reconsideration by Commissioner. Appellants Granted Personal Hearing.

The Tribunal set aside the Collector of Customs' order and remanded the case for reconsideration by the Commissioner of Customs. The appellants' appeal was allowed, granting them a personal hearing to establish the actual peripheral speed of the modified machine for proper classification and exemption eligibility under the Import Policy.

---

---

Issues:
1. Classification of imported machine under Customs Tariff.
2. Interpretation of Import Policy regarding peripheral speed.
3. Calculation of peripheral speed of the machine.
4. Adjudication by the Collector of Customs.
5. Appeal against the Order-in-Original.

Analysis:

1. The appellants imported a Centreless Grinding Machine and claimed classification under Tariff Heading 84.60 of the Customs Tariff 1975. They also sought clearance based on the peripheral speed of the machine under the Import Policy 1990-1993. The Collector of Customs, in the impugned order, held that the machine's peripheral speed did not meet the required criteria for exemption, as per the manufacturer's catalogue.

2. The appellants argued that they had modified the machine to achieve a peripheral speed of 47 m/sec by replacing the grinding wheel with a larger diameter. They submitted a formula for calculating the peripheral speed, emphasizing that the machine's actual speed exceeded the threshold. They also provided a Test Report from the manufacturer to support their claim, citing a previous Tribunal decision and a Supreme Court dismissal of a Revenue appeal.

3. The Collector of Customs adjudicated the case based on the manufacturer's catalogue, concluding that the machine did not meet the required peripheral speed for exemption under the Import Policy. The appellants contended that the machine's actual speed, with the modified grinding wheel, qualified for the exemption, as supported by the manufacturer's certificate and their formula for calculating peripheral speed.

4. The Tribunal noted that the impugned order lacked discussion on the formula for calculating peripheral speed and did not address the appellants' argument regarding the modified machine's actual speed. The manufacturer's certificate confirmed the machine's peripheral speed met the exemption criteria, contrary to the Collector's findings based on the catalogue.

5. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter to the Commissioner of Customs for a fresh decision, instructing a personal hearing for the appellants. The appeal was allowed by way of remand, providing an opportunity for a reconsideration of the classification and exemption eligibility based on the actual peripheral speed of the modified machine.

---