TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1997 (3) TMI 564
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ifiable as 'parts' under Customs Tariff Heading 9806. However, he has held that the item cables are excluded from the Heading 9806.00 by virtue of Note 7 to Chapter 98 read with Notification No. 132-Cus., dated 19-3-87 and be assessed under the respective headings. The claim of the importer for assessment of the item under Heading 8517.10 as a complete telephone and for benefit of Notification No. 172/77 was rejected by the Collector. The Collector has taken a view that the classification of the commodity has to be determined in accordance with the form in which the item is imported. In the instant case, the importer had imported 19 SKD parts of telephone with individual valve and the same was subject-matter of assessment. The importers ass....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... or welding, for example provided only simple assembly operations are involved. He has held that in respect of present import of 19 separate sub-assemblies it requires not only a process requiring technical know-how and design but also as may require essentially a process of manufacturing to be undertaken and therefore, cannot be categorised as a process of simple assembly. He has held that there is certainly a difference between a simple assembly and a phased manufacturing programme. Hence he has rejected the applicability of Rule 2(a) of the Interpretative Rules in the present case. On this premise, he has passed the final order. 2. The appellants are aggrieved with this finding and they have contended that the Collector has incor....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nded) would be attracted which grants benefit for items falling under 85.17 although those are excluded in column 4 of the Notification. It is his contention even though the parts would fall under column 4, yet the benefit of this Notification cannot be rejected, by application of Rule 2(a) of General Rules for Interpretation of Tariff. He submits that in the case of Sipani Automobiles Ltd. v. Collector of Customs, as reported in 1996 (16) RLT 646, the Tribunal has approved and followed the earlier judgment by applying Rule 2(a) for the purpose of classification in respect of sub-assemblies and it did reject it for the grant of benefit of Notification. However, he further points out that in the case of Winter Misra Diamond Tools Ltd. v. Col....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dings used in the Notification are the same as the ones used in the Rules or the Notes or the Headings or sub-headings, or the scope is similar, it is open to call in aid, or take the assistance of the Interpretative Rules and/or the Section Notes or Chapter Notes and the Notification(s) has to be read in the same sense and the wordings have to be assigned the same meaning unless the context indicates otherwise or some items are expressly excluded. In the present case, the wordings used in the Notification Nos. 108/88 and 207/88 are exactly the same as in the Heading 82.02. Therefore, the Chapter Note 2 could be called in aid in order to interpret and ascertain the meaning and scope of the wordings used in the notification, although, these ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssified as complete or finished article. But this Rule 2(a) is subject to Rule 1 for the purpose of classification of notes. Rule 1 states : "1. The titles of Sections, Chapters and sub-chapters are provided for ease of reference only; for legal purposes, classification shall be determined according to the terms of the headings and any relative Section or Chapter Notes and, provided such headings or Notes do not otherwise require." 9. Thus, the classification has to be determined in terms of Section notes or Chapter notes. Therefore, Note 1 to Chapter 98 has precedence over Interpretative Rule 2(a) in the present case [See Voltas Limited v. Collector of Customs - 1991 (56) E.L.T. 569]. 10. Admittedly, the items are n....