1986 (2) TMI 183

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Shri J. Gopinath. SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : K.L. Rekhi, Member (T)] . - A common issue is involved in both these appeals. They relate to the same appellants and were argued before us together. This common order is passed to dispose of both of them. 2. The appellants imported 70/30 Copper-Nickel Tubes for fittings to heat exchangers installed in their petroleum refine....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ction XVI, vide Note 2 to Section XV and Note 1(g) to Section XVI. This ground, however, was given up by the learned representative of the department before us. Instead, he put-forth a new ground saying that the Heading No. 75.04/06 (other articles of nickel) was more specific to cover the goods and that the tubes, as imported, were in straight length and were not identifiable as spare parts of an....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s, one could hardly associate them with particular machinery components. The appellants were at pains to convince us that the goods were machinery parts by virtue of their special physical standards and chemical composition conforming to ASTM and BSS to make them suitable for fitment in refinery heat exchangers. Even assuming that it were so, it does not necessarily follow that the goods will fall....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....xchangers and condensers, that is for the complete machines or systems. It is not specific for parts of those machines and systems. If the parts are such as have a more appropriate or specific Heading elsewhere, there is no reason why they should not be classified under the latter Heading. Interpretative Rule 3(a) says so. Within the Machinery Section XVI, Note 2(a) also says so. 4. The ma....