2002 (9) TMI 350

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tion + all equipments + fittings 1 No. Lab type Coir Test dyeing unit           (were classified under Heading 8451.40 read with Notification 59/87; Duty @ 35% + 45% + NIL CVD) (ii)     5 Nos. Dye Vats complete without circulation + all equipments + fittings           1 No. Lab type sample dyeing vat for test dyeing and colour matching coir           [were classified under Heading 7326.90 read with Notification 85/90; Duty @ 155% + 45% + 15% + 5% (SED)] After importation, the appellant contended that the six items at Sl. No. (ii) above should also merit classification under Heading 8....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eal No. 9/98, dtd. 22-6-1998, took a new ground that the items in question were not machines as known in trade/technical parlance and hence the correct classification ought to have been under Heading 7309. However, since the CEGAT had not permitted an alternate classification, the classification was effected under 7326, which according to the Commissioner was more appropriate classification. (f) This appeal is preferred against the afore-mentioned order in remand by the Commissioner (Appeals). 3. We have heard both sides and considered the matter and find :- (a)     The Tribunal's order was a de novo adjudication on a limited issue, as can be seen from Para 4 of the order No. C/1120/97-B2, dtd. 26-5-97 [1997....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of India (Published in Indian Customs Tariff Guide, 13th Edition, Appendix) it is seen that the test to determine Machinery or and component with the single question was "Is this article adopted for use in the equipment of an industrial concern ?" Without any qualification by the further question; "is it also equally well adopted for other use ?" This answer to this question to our mind has been incorporated in Section XVI Note 4 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, which reads as under :- "4. Where a machine (including a combination of machines) consists of individual components (whether separate or interconnected by piping, by transmission devices, by electric cables or by other devices) intended to contribute together to a clearly defi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Coir Yarn per both." Thereafter he concludes that the vats imported by the appellants were not of general purpose because of the fittings attached. We find that the Commissioner (Appeals) in the order impugned before us has merely gone by HSN notes and records that "neither on the trade parlance or technical terms such containers i.e. vats used in the dyeing industry with the abovesaid seven items could be called dyeing machines". He has not recorded, what is the evidence available to derive the trade parlance material or other evidence, which has led him to these conclusions. We do not find any such material. On the contrary, need for Coir Industry Dyeing is on record. He has not given a finding on applicability or otherwise of Note 4 to S....