1984 (3) TMI 409

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Shri K. V. Kunhikrishnan, JDR, for the Respondents. ORDER The question for decision in these four appeals, originally filed as revision application to Government of India, is classification for the purpose of c.v.d. on Vitavex H.F. Speaker unit imported by the appellants by four Bills of Entry No. Cash 3157 dated 26-7-1975, 901 dated 9-10-1976, 2823 dated 26-11-1976 and 2122, dated 18-10-1....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....under tariff item No. 37B of the CET and that they do not manufacture any gramophones, Record Players, Record Playing decks, Record changer decks or parts and accessories thereof falling under tariff item 37A of the CET. The goods were 'imported by the appellants under actual user licence as component parts of projection equipment and not that of gramophones or record changer, etc. The goods impor....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f item 33f(2) of CET but residuary item of T.I. 68. Shri Shah also argued that Philips India who manufacture speakers like those imported by the appellants were levied central excise duty under tariff item 68 and not under 37A(ii). A letter from the Philips India Ltd. dated 15-5-1975 addressed to the appellants stating that refund of differential duty would be made to them was produced. Reliance w....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the Tribunal in Murphy India Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise and Customs, Bombay reproduced in 1983 E.L.T. 828. He therefore, argued for dismissal of the appeal. 4. We have carefully considered the arguments advanced by the parties. According to the appellants while a theoretical use of the imported speakers in gramophone, record player etc. may be possible the same would not he commer....