1996 (7) TMI 334

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ant, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Shiben K. Dhar, Member (T)]. - Both these appeals involving common question of law and facts were heard together and are being disposed of through this common order. 2. The appellants imported certain goods claimed to be intended to be used as parts for manufacture of electronic equipment and therefore claimed concessional rate of duty under....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d 26-9-1986 from Joint Director, Deptt. of Electronics states that three items forming parts of the complete system on a dedicated basis and they do not have an independent application as stand alone units. 4. Ld. DR submits that these are finished parts by themselves and therefore, exemption could not be given in respect of these goods. 5. We have heard both sides. At the outset, ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....onic equipment. In other words, there ought to have been a definite finding in this regard. We find from Page 12 the certificate from the competent authority as required under Notification certifying these goods are used for manufacture of finished specified goods. In fact letter dated 26-9-1986 specifically states that items 2, 3, and 4 of their certificate i.e. Controller, PID and Programmer wit....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hat the impugned goods, even though finished goods themselves, have been actually used as parts in manufacture of electronic equipment and these are parts for the manufacture of electronic equipment within the terms of Notification No. 233/83. We also do not agree with the ld. Collector that the certificate of Jt. Director, Department of Electronics is purely recommendatory. In fact the certificat....