1984 (8) TMI 323

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he Appellants. Shri Chandermouli, S.D.R., for the Respondent. ORDER Question for decision in these two appeals, originally filed as Revision Applications to the Government of India, transferred to the Tribunal and being taken up as appeals, which are being disposed of by this common order are classification of `As is machines' imported by the appellants under Heading 72(b)-ICT as claimed ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Customs are not in the file. From the orders-in-appeal dated 22-7-1976, passed by the Appellate Collector of Customs, Bombay, it appears that the goods were classified under Heading 73-ICT and not under Heading 72(b)-ICT, as claimed by the appellants and were also held liable to countervailing duty under Tariff Item 33D of the Central Excise Tariff as Office Machines. The orders were upheld in ap....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the goods 'As is Machines' at the relevant time were not classifiabie under T.I. 33D of C.E.T., Shri Sundara Raman relied on appellants own case reported in 1980 E.L.T. 274. 5. On behalf of the Department, Shri Chandramouli, learned Senior Departmental Representative had no comments to make on the appellants' claim. 6. Though copies of precedents at 4(i) and (ii) above are claimed ....