Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Mumbai
Suz-Dent (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs Cc Ex. on 28 October, 2003
Equivalent citations: 2004(165)ELT364(TRI-MUMBAI)
ORDER
K.K. Usha, J. (President)
1. When the application for stay came up for hearing, we find that in the nature of the issue involved the appeal itself can be disposed of. We, therefore, dispense with the condition for pre-deposit and proceed to dispose of the appeal.
2. The issue for consideration is whether value of certain dental equipments and hand pieces of dental chair imported by the appellant are to be added to the assessable value of the dental chair manufactured and cleared by the assessee.
3. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of dental equipments/units classifiable under sub-heading No. 9016.00 and dental chairs and dentist's stool classifiable under sub-heading 9402.10 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. They have been importing certain dental equipments and hand pieces of dental chair. According to the appellant, such hand pieces were never assembled or fitted to the dental chair. They were sold in retail or along with the chair in their packed condition. As no manufacturing process was carried out on these hand-pieces, the appellants submit that its value is not liable to the added to that of the dental chair. They received separate orders for those hand -pieces and separate invoices of resale were raised for the sale of such hand- pieces. Show cause notice dated 18.5.99 was issued to the appellant directing them to show cause as to why differential duty amounting to Rs. 1,38,729/-should not be recovered and penalty should not be imposed on them. In spite of the reply given by the assessee, the adjudicating authority confirmed the demand. The appeal filed by the assessee was dismissed by the Commissioner (Appeals). The above order is under challenge in this appeal.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned DR. The Revenue has no case that these hand-pieces equipments have been assembled or fitted into dentist chair. The dental chairs were manufactured with its controls. Such controls are having universal coupling or universal joint. The hand-pieces which are supplied to the dentists are fitted to the dental chair by the dentists themselves. One of the hand-pieces thus supplied is digital pulp tester. It is not required to be fitted to the controls of the chair at all. It is a hand-piece which is self contained. Pulp tester can be placed by the dentist on the tooth and by starting the button he can take the reading. These hand-pieces are supplied to the dentists as and when required by them even independent of the supply of the chairs.
5. After hearing both sides, we are convinced that the supply of these hand-pieces is only a trading activity. Since no manufacturing activity is undertaken by the assessee in connection with these hand-pieces, its value cannot be added to the assessable value of the dental chairs. The learned counsel for the appellant has correctly placed reliance on the ratio of the decision of this Tribunal in Tata Telecom Ltd. v. CCE. Cochin 2003(110) ECR 650(Tribunal). In the result, we set aside the order impugned and allow the appeal.
Operative part of the order already pronounced in the open Court 2.10.2003.