Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.18 seconds)
Bennett Coleman & Co. Ltd. vs Collector Of Customs on 10 April, 1990 cites

Nyloprint Engravers vs Collector Of Customs on 27 August, 1984

From the various references made, the clear conclusion emerges that the machine is for developing carbon tissue, during the entire process of printing. The appellants have also pointed out that the Developing Machine is a part and parcel of the other machines viz. Transferring Machine and Etching Machine required to make Gravure Cylinders. Reliance has been placed by the department on the Explanatory Notes in CCCN. That Heading 84.34 excludes photographic apparatus like: Camera, Enlargers or Reducer, Photographic contact printers and similar photographic apparatus for preparing printing plates or cylinders. It is held by the Asstt. Collector that contact printer falls under 90.10, and the Developing Machine required to fix the exposed surface has to fall under 90.10, and not Heading 84.34 and the Collector (Appeals) has by referring to CCCN Notes has held that Developing Machine for developing sensitised carbon paper would fall under 90.10. The Heading 90.10 refers to "Apparatus and equipment for automatically developing photographic (including cinematographic) film or paper in rolls or for automatically exposing developed film to rolls of photographic paper". While it has been pointed supra that the Developing Machine is meant for developing the carbon tissue paper, and not contact printer, there does not appear to be any evidence let in that this is an apparatus or equipment of a kind used in photographies or cinematographics laboratories. The Tribunal in its decision in 1985 (19) ELT 415 -in the case of M/s. Nyloprint Engravers, Calcutta v. Collector of Customs, Calcutta has held the same view :-
Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Delhi Cites 3 - Cited by 1 - Full Document
1