2004 (5) TMI 111

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the correctness of the impugned order-in-original, dated 30-9-2003 has been contested by the appellants vide which the Commissioner of Customs has denied them benefit of Notification 16/2000-Cus., dated 1-3-2000. 2. The learned Counsel has contended that the benefit of the above said Notification in respect of the machinery (Fermentor) imported by the appellants had been wrongly denied on the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ame, as the appellants sought classification under CTH 8419.89, while the Department wanted to classify the same under CTH 8479.89. The dispute was resolved ultimately by the Tribunal in an appeal filed by the appellants against the order of the adjudicating authority who refused to accept the classification as profounded by them, by holding the classification under sub-heading 8479.89 of the CT v....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....veals that it covers machinery for production of commodities classifiable under sub-heading 8479.50/8479.89. No such condition regarding the marketability of the commodities as such produced by such machinery, had been prescribed therein. Therefore, any machinery meant for production of commodities and classifiable under the above said sub-headings of the CTH, shall stand covered by this Notificat....