Hot air stenter capacity cannot include gallery length, so duty demands based on that counting fail.

For determining the annual production capacity of a hot air stenter, gallery length cannot be counted as part of the chambers. The text states that a larger bench had already held galleries were not chambers for this purpose, so any capacity enhancement based on including gallery length was impermissible. Once the gallery is excluded from the chamber count, the foundation for the differential duty demand falls away, making the demand unsustainable. The result recorded is that the appeals succeeded and the impugned orders were set aside with consequential relief.

---

---

Issues: Whether the length of galleries attached to a hot air stenter could be treated as chambers for determining annual production capacity and, on that basis, sustain the demand of differential duty.

Analysis: The dispute turned on the computation of chambers in the hot air stenter used for manufacture of fabrics. The length of galleries had been added to the chambers for fixing production capacity and demanding duty. A larger bench had already held that the gallery cannot be treated as a chamber for the purpose of determining production capacity. Once the gallery is excluded from the chamber count, the foundation for the enhanced capacity and the consequential duty demand disappears.

Conclusion: The addition of gallery length to the chambers was impermissible, and the differential duty demand could not be sustained.

Final Conclusion: The appeals succeeded and the impugned orders were set aside with consequential relief.

Ratio Decidendi: For determining production capacity of a hot air stenter, gallery length cannot be counted as part of the chambers, and any duty demand founded on such inclusion is unsustainable.

---