1997 (7) TMI 385

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ods covered by the Notification No. 65/88-Cus., dated 1-3-1988. Under Notification No. 65/88-Cus., dated 1-3-1988 concessional rate of customs duty was provided to the specified medical equipment where accessories and spare parts at Sl. No. (3)/(4) of the Table annexed to that Notification No. 65/88-Cus. Stereo Zoom Microscope for inspection of contact lenses were included. The appellants had imported Stereo Zoom Binocular Head DZ-240 with paired WF 10X eyepieces and with fluorescent Ring illuminator to 220V for Stereo Zoom Binocular Microscope Model DZ 240 used in inspection of contact lenses. The appellants have declared their goods as component parts of the Stereo Zoom Microscopes for inspection of contact lenses and claimed the benefit ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....aracteristics of finished components and that the only thing missing was a stand for something which would hold the items at the place. While approving the classification under Heading No. 9011.10, she had denied the benefit of Notification No. 66/88-Cus. 5. Rule 2(a) of the Rules of interpretation provides that any reference in a heading to an articles shall be taken to include a reference to that article incomplete or unfinished provided that as presented the incomplete or unfinished articles has the essential character of the complete or finished article. We find that the goods were not presented for assessment as one article but as component for Stereo Zoom Microscope. The Adjudicating Authority had taken three different items v....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....re of the material, its bulk, quantity, weight or value. The Tribunal had further observed that while no general principles can be laid down at to how and in what circumstances Rule 2(a) could be pressed into service for assessment of the imported unfinished article, in each case the factors enumerated above would have to be taken into consideration individually, and then collectively, to determine whether the imported article had attained the approximate shape or outline of the finished article and could be used only for completion into the finished article (Head Note). This Larger Bench's decision has been followed by the Tribunal in the case of TELCO v. Collector of Customs - 1990 (50) E.L.T. 571 (Tribunal). 8. Keeping in view th....