TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1990 (1) TMI 256
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ondent. [Order per : S.L. Peeran, Member (J)]. - The Revenue has sought for restoration of order-in-original passed by the Assistant Collector of Customs, Bombay in order dated 5-10-1984 by setting aside the order-in-appeal dated 30-8-1985 passed by Collector of Customs (Appeals). 2. The short question involved in this appeal is whether classification of imported goods, namely Ceramic Pythagor....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....m 23-B of CET is "Chinaware and porcelain ware, all sorts". The description under heading 69 of Customs Tariff is "Ceramic products". 5. Shri L.C. Chakravarti, appearing for Revenue, submitted that the definition of 'Ware' in Concise Oxford Dictionary means things manufactured for sale specifically pottery of any kind. Therefore, he submitted that in ordinary parlance 'Ware' means Ceramic or chin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....der heading 68 of CET. He relied upon the ruling by the Hon'ble Supreme Court given in the case of Atul Glass Industries v. Collector of Central Excise & Others [1986 (25) E.L.T. 473] and therefore, sought for dismissal of this appeal and upheld the impugned order-in-appeal. 7. We have heard both sides, carefully gone through the submissions and also perused the citation. In Dunlop India Ltd. v. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in these and who purchase and use them. This view is found in Advani Oerlikon Ltd. &Another v. Union of India & Others (1981 E.L.T. 432) by Bombay High Court. The ruling of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Atul Glass Industries Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise & Others reported in 1986 (25) E.L.T. 473 [1986 (10) ECC 1 (SC)] at para 8 is also relevant. The same is reproduced below - "It is a matter....