Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Delhi
Kishan Floor Mills vs Collector Of Customs on 9 April, 1987
Equivalent citations: 1989(41)ELT576(TRI-DEL)
ORDER I.J. Rao, Member (T)
1. The appellants imported Scroll Springs under Bill of Entry No. 26737 dated 2.11.1979. The goods were classified under Heading 73.33/40 and the appellants paid duty accordingly. Subsequently, the appellants filed an application for refund of part of the duty claiming reclassification of the goods under Hd. 84.29-CTA on the ground that the imported goods were identifiable parts of Flour Mill and were used there exclusively. The Appellate Collector upheld the Asstt. Collector's order.
2. The appellants, thereafter filed a Revision Application before the Central Government. This application on statutory transfer to this Tribunal is now an appeal before us.
3. We heard Shri N.K. Jain, Prop. of appellant's firm. Shri Jam explained with reference to a letter dated 22.7.1980 written by M/s Henry Simon (in England), the manufacturers that the imported scroll springs appeared in catalogue and bore part No. Shri Jain further submitted that these springs are used exclusively in flour mills and cannot be used anywhere else. He, therefore, requested that the goods imported should be treated as parts of a Flour Mill and as such classified under Hd. 84.29-CTA.
4. Shri J. Gopinath, Ld. SDR, submitted that even if the imported goods are identifiable as exclusive parts of Flour Mills, they are springs and Section Note l(g) to Section XVI read with Note 2 to Section XV renders the springs liable to be classification under Hd. 73.33/40-CTA as parts of general use. In this context, the Ld. SDR referred to an Order of the Tribunal in Gordon Woodroffe & Co. v. Collector of Customs, Madras, 1987 (27) ELT 99 (Tribunal). Ld. SDR submitted that Section notes are quite clear and that the ratio of the cited Judgment was followed in a number of decisions of the Tribunal.
5. We have considered the arguments of both sides. Note l(g) to Section XVI (Chapter 83) does not cover parts of general use as defined under Note 2 to Section XV. Note 2 to Section XV defines parts of general use, and specifically mentions springs.
6. Taking into consideration this position and also following the ratio of the Judgment cited by the Ld. SDR we hold that even though the imported goods were identifiable as part of floor mill, they are springs and, therefore, were correctly classified under Heading 73.33/40.
7. We, therefore, dismiss the appeal.