1988 (7) TMI 194

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rotest, the duty as per Customs classification and thereafter filed the claim for refund invoking the benefit of Notification No. 145/77-Customs, dated 9-7-1977. This claim was rejected by the Assistant Collector on the ground that the benefit of Notification No. 145/77 was applicable only to goods covered under Chapter 88 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act. He held that the impugned goods were classifiable under Chapter 94 and were, therefore, outside the purview of the said notification. When the matter went up in appeal, the Collector of Customs (Appeals) admitted the claim of Indian Airlines to the benefit of Notification No. 91/68-C.E., dated 30-4-1968, which exempted from the whole of Excise duty on steel seats and chairs....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....al shipments cannot be regarded as steel furniture". (Min. of Finance (DRI) F.No. B. 2/2/68-CXI, dated 25-3-1968) 3. Also, he has emphasized that the goods are serially numbered "parts" of aircraft. It is pointed out that the impugned goods were also invoiced as "parts" of aircraft. Furniture and parts thereof, it is submitted, are covered by Notification 145/77. 4. Shri Mathur relies on the following case law:- 1. 1978 E.L.T. J 194- Central Distillery and Chemical Works v. Inspector of Central Excise, MOR, Meerut & Another. 2.1979 E.L.T. J 265-Jiwan Singh & Sons and Another v. Senior Superintendent of Central Excise, Jullundur and Another. 3. 1980 E.L.T. 231 - Materials Handling Engg. Co. v. M.G. Waknis, Suptd. of Central Excise and ....