TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1987 (4) TMI 160
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... repeat machines imported by the respondents was designed for taking copies of the designs from photographic positive or negative to the sensitized materials like zinc, aluminium or photographic plates or films. He was of the view that as it was a photo copying machine, which transfers the designs on the . principle of contact and exposure, it fits into the description of such machines given in the explanatory notes on page 1554 BTN under Heading 90.10 of CCCN. He had confirmed the original assessment under Heading 90.10 of the CTA 1975 and had rejected the refund claim. Being aggrieved from the aforesaid order the respondent had filed an appeal before the learned Collector of Customs (Appeals), Bombay. Before the Collector of Customs (Appeals), respondent had contended that the function of this step and repeat machine was only for preparing large film which designs at a required distance. This film was then taken to another machine for printing the designs on the metal roller by exposing films and, therefore, since step and repeat machine helped the machine which prints the design on the metal roller in the textile mills, it could be considered as a ancillary printing machine unde....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lector of Customs (Appeals). On a similar issue involving the classification of identical machine, the CEGAT held the classification of the step and repeat machine under heading 84.40 11985(24) E.L.T. 662, CC Bombay v. M/s Bharat Vijay Mills]. The appellant propose to take up a law point for the interpretation of the Custom Tariff, by way of reference to the relevant interpretative rules, Section and chapter notes and plead for an alternative classification under Heading 84.59(1), without prejudice to classification under Heading 90.10. As the above is purely a legal submission, it is requested that the appellant may be permitted to plead for alternative classification under Heading 84.59(1) in addition to the points already mentioned in the appeal memorandum." 4.  Shri J.M. Patel, the Ld. Advocate, who has appeared on behalf of the respondents, has objected to the appellant's application for the amendment of the grounds of appeal. He has pleaded that the application for the amendment of the ground of appeal has been signed by Shri J. Gopinath and is not signed by the Collector of Customs, Bombay, who is the appellant. He has pleaded that the Collector of Customs, Bombay ha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Ltd. v. CCE Bombay reported in 1984(15) E.L.T. 186 where in the latter case the Tribunal had held that - "Apart from this, he argued that the fresh ground should not be allowed to be taken at this stage, since it had not been taken before the lower authorities or in the original appeal to the Tribunal. The Bench considered that, since the appeal involved the question of correct classification of the goods, on which a ruling would have to be given, it would not be in the interests of justice or conduce to a proper disposal if the appellants are prevented from raising a new ground. The Bench accordingly indicated that this ground would be allowed to be raised." In view of the above discussion, we over-rule the objection of Shri J.M. Patel, the learned Advocate, for the respondent and hold that for the proper disposal of the appeal there has to be a correct classification and this plea, which is purely a legal plea, should be permitted at the appellate stage. 7.  On merits, Shri J. Gopinath, the learned S.D.R., has reiterated the facts. He has relied on a judgment of the Tribunal in the case of Collector of Customs, Bombay v. Bharat Vijay Mills, Kalol reported in 1986(24) E.L.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the CTA. He further pleads that it is not a printing machine nor is a part or accessory of the same and at best it can be a machine ancillary to a repeat printing machine. He has referred to note 5 of chapter 584 which lays down that a machine, which is used for more than one purpose is, for the purposes of classification, to be treated as if its principal purposes were its sole purpose. Lastly, Shri Gopinath has pleaded that the Tribunal has ruled out the classification under Headings 84.34 and 84.35 and the correct classification is under Heading 90.10 in case appellant's plea for its classification under Heading 90.10 is not accepted, alternatively it may be assessed under Heading 84.59(1). He has pleaded for the acceptance of the appeal. 8. Shri J.M. Patel, the learned Advocate, has opposed the acceptance of the appeal and in support of his argument he states that the imported machine does not fall under 90.10. It is an ancillary to the textile industry, different designs are made at required distance and the main function is step and repeat and no photographic function is involved. He has referred to the statement of facts made before the Collector of Customs (Appeals)....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s most appropriately fall under Heading 84.40 i.e. machines of a type used for printing a repetitive design, repetitive words or over-all colour on textiles. Heading 90.10 relates to apparatus and equipment of a kind used in photographic or cinematographic laboratories and Heading 84.55(1) relates to machines and mechanical appliances, having individual functions, not falling within any other heading of this chapter. For classification, it is an accepted principle that where the goods are imported, the goods have to be classified under a heading which tallies most with the description of the goods. In the present matter before us the function and the description of the goods is not disputed. Our views are further supported by an earlier judgment of the Tribunal in the case of Collector of Customs, Bombay v. Bharat Vijay Mills, Kalol reported in 1986(24) E.L.T. 662. Paragraph Nos. 13 and 14 of the said judgment are reproduced below :- "13. The machine imported by M/s Bharat Vijay Mills is a complex one; the Heading 84.40 contemplates printing machine for treatment of textiles and using the rule of interpretation relied upon by the Appellate Collector, one can say easily that this h....