1996 (9) TMI 330

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....pellant. Shri O.N. Ojha, JDR, for the Respondents. [Order per : Shiben K. Dhar, Member (T)]. - These two appeals are directed against common Order-in-Appeal No. 3077/88-BCH of Collector of Customs (Appeals), Bombay. Since by common order-in-appeal, Collector (Appeals) disposed of two appeals, the appellants were asked to file supplementary appeal which they have now filed alongwith applic....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s are specific parts of compressors and in support of this contention draws our attention to catalogue presented in the Court. He submits that Tariff Item 68 is a residuary item. He cites the case of Dunlop India Ltd. & Madras Rubber Factory Ltd. v. Union of India & Others as reported in 1983 (13) E.L.T. 1566 (S.C.). 3. Arguing for the Revenue, ld. DR submits that the goods admittedly are ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....and Salt Act, 1944 from the whole of duty of excise leviable thereon except those parts which have been specified in the notification itself. Compressor admittedly is one such part which is excluded from the purview of this notification. 5. The impugned goods admittedly are not compressors by themselves but parts of compressors. What is excluded is compressor, not the parts of the compress....