TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1990 (11) TMI 142
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., Bombay are manufacturers of Injection Moulding Machines of four categories and the same were classified under Tariff Item No. 68. For these machines they manufacture approximately 19 parts, one of which is called "Tie Bar Nuts" which are the subject matter of this appeal. The Tie Bar Nuts are manufactured from 2¾ " hexagonal M.S. Bar having special threads known as `acme threads'. The Tie Bar Nuts are stated to be components of Injection Moulding Machines (tailormade) and are used to fix the platens in correct distances in between tie bars. 2. The appellants submitted their classification list for the year 1981-82 for 84 gms., 56 gms., and 70 gms. semi-automatic and fully automatic "Plasmac" Injection Moulding Machines under Tar....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the continuous process of manufacture of the machines and formed its integral part, being specifically made for use in the machines; and that Tie Bar Nuts were neither available nor saleable in the market, their only function being to fix the platens in correct distances between Tie Bars. 3. The Appellate Tribunal held that from the evidence on record it is found that according to the appellants themselves the Tie Bar Nuts in question have the function of fastening for the machine and, therefore, the contention that the main function of Tie Bar Nuts is not to fasten any part but to adjust the distance between two platens does not change the complex of the case, and that there is no doubt that the Tie Bar Nuts would merit classificatio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....amine these contentions. 6. The appellants contention that the department having earlier approved the classification of Tie Bar Nuts under Tariff Item 68 has no justification for its revision is, to our mind, not tenable inasmuch as there could be no estoppel against a statute. If according to law Tie Bar Nuts fall within Tariff Item 52 the fact that the department earlier approved their classification under Tariff Item 68 will not estop it from revising that classification to one under Tariff Item 52. See M/s. Elson Machines Pvt. Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise - 1988 (38) E.L.T. 571 (SC) = 1989 Suppl. (1) SCC 671, Para 10 at 675. 7. The submission that the Tie Bar Nuts manufactured by the appellants to specifications of Injectio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dent on whether the manufacturer is the owner or not. The question whether the producer or the manufacturer is or is not the owner of goods is not determinative of the liability. 8. Mr. Puchkanimal has emphasised that fastening has not been the function of Tie Bar Nuts manufactured by the appellants and used in their Injection Moulding Machines, and so those would not fall under Tariff Item 52. Tariff Item 52 at the relevant time said : "52. Bolts and nuts, threaded or tapped and screws, of base metal or alloys thereof, in or in relation to the manufacture of which any process is ordinarily carried on with the aid of power. Explanation. - The expression `Bolts and nuts, threaded or tapped and screws' used in this item shall incl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g else; to attach by a tie or bond." `Fix' according to the same dictionary means "I.1. to fasten, make firm or stable; to set or place and secure against displacement." `Nut' according to the same dictionary means "II.3.a small block of wood, iron, etc., pierced, and wormed with a female screw; used to make a bold fast or adjust it." 10. `Fasten' according to Collins English Dictionary means "1. to make or become fast or secure; 2. to make or become attached or joined; 3. to close or become closed by fixing firmly in place, locking etc." `Fix' according to the same dictionary means "1. to make or become firm, stable or secure; 2. to attach or place permanently." 11. According to Webster Comprehensive Dictionary International Edition ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....R 294 and Dunlop India Ltd. v. U.O.I - 1983 (13) E.L.T. 1566 (S.C.) = (1976) 2 SCC 241 have settled this proposition. How is the product identified by the class or section of people dealing with or using the product is also a test when the statute itself does not contain any definition and commercial parlance would assume importance when the goods are marketable as was held in Atul Glass Industries (Pvt.) Ltd. v. Collr. of C. Ex. - 1986 (25) E.L.T. 473 (SC) = (1986) 3 SCC 480 and Indian Aluminium Cables Ltd. v. U.O.I. - 1985 (21) E.L.T. 3 (SC) = (1985) 3 SCC 284. In M/s. Asian Paints India Ltd. v. Collr. of C. Ex. - 1988 (35) E.L.T. 3 (SC) = (1988) 2 SCC 470 which was a case of Emulsion paint, at para 8 it was said : "It is well settled ....