Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

5. The issue for determination is whether the exclusion made for transformers would cover parts thereof or whether the parts would enjoy the concessional rates.

6. A similar issue was examined by the Tribunal in their judgment in the case of Dtim-Metallic (India) Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, Madras, reported in 1997 (89) E.L.T. 778 (Tribunal). In this case the Tribunal was examining whether the benefit given to power driven pump vide entry at Serial No. 1 of Notification No. 155/86-C.E. could be extended to 'parts' or 'component parts' of such power driven pumps. In Para 6 of the judgment, the Tribunal observed as under :

"It will be seen from Serial No. 1 relating to Heading 84.13 and Table to the Notification which refers to description of goods, there is 110 mention of any "component part" of power driven pumps. On the other hand, it would be observed that against Sl. No. 5 relating to Heading 84.22 there is a specific mention of "parts" under sub-item (iii) of Column (3). It will be obvious from this that while granting exemption for "power driven pumps" the Central Government had no intention to include "parts" of power driven pumps for the concessional rate of duty allowed under the Notification".