TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1984 (5) TMI 170
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 2. The appellants imported 3 Cases Plastic Cable Insulating Line under Bill of Entry No. 127, dated 9-4-1979 and claimed concessional assessment under Notfn. No. 40-Cus., dated 1-3-1978 as amended by Notification No. 109-Cus., dated 19-5-1978. By his order dated 3-7-1979, the Assistant Collector of Customs held that the goods mainly consist of items like Plastic Extruder above 150 mm Screwdia, pay off system, Liner Capston measuring machine, spark tester and take joint system etc. all imported as one complete line of equipment for the manufacture of insulated cables and the goods are, therefore, not a mere extruder but a Complete Cable Manufacturing unit of which the Extruder is a part. Notification No. 40/78 allows concessional rate of d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... since 1969 and have not committed any infringement of Customs, Excise or Import Control requirements. They placed an order for Plastic Extruder of 200 mm diameter and were supplied this along with indispensable accessories. The Customs split the consignment into the two part Bs/E one for the extruder and some accessories and the other for only the remaining accessories. The order-in-appeal is in respect of Bill of Entry 3/127, dated 1-4-1979 covering Plastic Extruder 200 mm Screw diameter and accessories such as payoff system, linear Capstan Measuring Machine, Spark Tester and take joint system etc. The Group concerned separated the value of the extruder and gave the benefit of 25% and charged the remaining accessories to 40% A.V. duty and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uld go along with the extruder even for the benefit of the notification. Fourthly, the order was for a complete 20 mm screw diameter Plastic Extruder and if the suppliers have supplied the accessories it is to complete the Extruder. The Invoice covering the goods is also for the complete Extruder. Copies of these documents are submitted. It is, therefore, pleaded that the accessories have been only legally separated to the prejudice of the appellants and the extruder and accessories deserve assessment together at the concessional rate. 4. The case was part heard on 7th February, 1984 and was adjourned as the learned Advocate, Shri Kochar desired to make a claim under the Accessories (Condition) Rules 1963 and to produce a supplier's cata....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....C/35(4)79/752, dated 5-5-1979 from the C&IE to the Collector giving the DGTD opinion that the accessories like pay-off, capstain, in line voltage tester, take up units from a complete extrusion line and an extruder is useful only when these are there otherwise it is of no use. He cited 1983 (14) E.L.T. 2029 -Aaccunex v. Collector of Central Excise, Bombay where this Bench gave due weight to the opinion of the DGTD in assessment of a gear Eccentricity Tester. Shri Kochar relied on the notes to Section XVI and argued that (i) complementary machines are to be assessed as the machine performing the main function (Note 3 to Section XVI) (ii) parts recognisable as specialised for particular use with a machine are classified in the same Heading as....