AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1984 (8) TMI 321
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Customs, Calcutta. After coming into existence of the Tribunal, the said revision petition stands transferred to the Tribunal under Section 131-B of the Customs Act, 1962 and is being disposed of as an appeal. 2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the appellant had imported a Bag Closing Unit Style 91800HA with sewing head valued at Rs. 60,455.00 ex.s.s. Pearl Merchant, Rot No. 546/78, Line No. 88 and had sought its clearance against licence No. 2208893 dated 2nd August, 1977 which is for permissible spare parts for maintenance of imported machinery or imported parts used in the licence holder's factory. The goods were declared on the Bills of Entry as spares for bag closing machine (sewing and single head) parts of industrial....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on. He had, however, quashed the penalty in full. Being aggrieved from the aforesaid order, the appellant has come in appeal before this court. 3. Shri R.N. Bajoria, the learned Sr. Advocate along with Shri K.K. Ganguly, Advocate, has appeared on behalf of the appellant and has reiterated the facts. He has pleaded that the item imported by the appellant is a spare and not a complete unit. He has given the examples of electric motor regulators and other machineries which are, though complete units in themselves, to be treated as spare parts for a particular unit. There are particular units which cannot work without electric motors and electric motors are duly fitted with them and as such the same have to be treated as spare parts, th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y can be made without using nut and bolt and the import of the same is duly prohibited. Lastly, he has referred to the Supreme Court judgment in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax, Madras v. Mir Mohammad Ali reported in AIR 1964 S.C. 1693. In that case the assessee was a bus owner and transport operator and had replaced the petrol engines in two of his motor buses by new diesel engines. The Hon'ble Supreme Court had held that the word 'machinery' occurs in clauses. (iv), (v), (vi) and (vi-a) of Section 2 of the Income-tax Act, 1922 and the same meaning must be given to the word in all these clauses. If a machine is machinery for purposes of giving all allowance in respect of insurance or for repairs or in respect of normal depreciati....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 5. After hearing both the sides and going through the facts and circumstances of the case, I feel that the argument of the Sr. Advocate that the imported item viz stitching unit is a spare part and not a machine is not tenable. The judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax, Madras v. Mir Mohammad Ali does not help him, when specific definitions as to capital goods, spare, accessory, or part, have been given in the Import Policy April 1978-Mareh 1979. The definitions as given in the Import Policy have to be applied in respect of the imported item. In the said judgment the Hon'ble Supreme Court had held that where an assessee who is a bus owner and transport operator owning a fleet of buses, replace....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rd 'machinery' is an ordinary and not a technical word - must unless there is something in the context, prevail in the Indian Income-tax Act also. (14) According to the above definition, a diesel engine is clearly 'machinery'. Indeed, Rule 8 of the Income-tax Rules treats aero-engines separately from aircraft. It is true that this rule cannot be used to interpret the clauses in the Act but it does show that components of an aircraft which are machinery, can be treated separately." In the instant case, the appellant had imported stitching unit. The appellant had imported the item in the relevant year 1978-79 and the import Policy April 1978-Mareh 1979 is applicable. The definitions of 'capital goods', 'spare accessory' and part have be....