TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1995 (12) TMI 128
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....[Order per : S.K. Bhatnagar, Vice President]. - This is an appeal with reference to the order of the Collector (Appeals), Madras, dated 2-12-1985. 2. Learned representative of the appellants stated that they had imported Auto-Pasters which are parts of the WEB printing machine. 3. The machine had itself been imported earlier and these parts were imported subsequently. They were class....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eparately. 5. It was their submission that it was a part and not accessory. They had produced the photographs in support of their contention. In response to Bench's query, the learned representative of the appellants stated that he has not filed any catalogue or technical literature. However, he can do so if time was allowed for this purpose. It was his submission that since the Web Printing....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....der-in-appeal. He stated that as noted by these authorities, the original consignment of the printing machine was itself imported in 1981 and the original contract did not provide for supply of autopaster. The autopasters were imported as a result of a separate order in 1983 i.e. about two years after the importation of the machine which had been running&n....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Learned representative of the appellants reiterated his view point. 11. We have considered the above submissions. We observe that the learned DR's submissions have a lot of force and the orders of the lower authorities are correct. 12. Admittedly, there is no dispute on the classification as these items were already classified under the same heading in which the main machine had earlie....