1990 (7) TMI 216

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he Appellants. Shri Prabhat Kumar, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Harish Chander, Member (J)]. -  The appellants have filed an appeal being aggrieved from the order passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals), Madras. The said appeal on Form No. C.A. 3 was received in the Registry on the 10th day of May, 1985. In col. No. 3 the date of communication has been mentioned as 31-1....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Rules, 1962. Accordingly, the appellants had filed the appeal on Form No. CA-3. He pleaded that the appeal on plain paper and on CA-3 Form may be read together and it may be deemed that the appeal was filed within limitation. 3. Shri M. S. Arora, learned D.R. does not oppose the request of the learned Advocate. 4. After hearing both the sides, we hold that the appeal was received in the Re....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....0 (46) E.L.T. 62 - Coronation Litho Works v. Collector of Customs. Shri Sridharan argued that in all the decisions the Tribunal had held that the goods are classifiable under Heading 84.40 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 and in the case of Coronation Litho Works v. Collector of Customs it was held that the CVD is to be charged under Tariff Item 68. Shri Sridharan has pleaded for the acceptance ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Ltd. reported in 1987 (29) E.L.T. 647 (Tribunal) = 1987 (12) ECR 29; and Collector of Customs, Bombay v. Bharat Vijay Mills, Kalol reported in 1986 (24) E.L.T. 662, we hold that step and repeat machine imported by the appellants is classifiable under Heading 84.40 Customs Tariff Act, 1975 and the CVD is to be levied under Tariff Item 68 of Central Excise Tariff. Before we part with this matter, w....