1983 (2) TMI 306 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Classification of imported goods under the Customs Tariff Schedule.
2. Distinction between industrial and domestic sewing machines.
3. Interpretation of sub-headings under Heading 84.41 of the Customs Tariff Schedule.
4. Applicability of Indian Standard Specifications and Explanatory Notes to BTN.
5. Relevance of previous judgments and orders.
6. Application of Interpretative Rules for classification.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Classification of Imported Goods under the Customs Tariff Schedule:
The primary issue revolves around the classification of "Industrial Sewing machine parts TA-I Type, namely, Rotating Hook Complete with Bobbin Case - Thread Take Up Lever Complete with Crank and Lock Pin" under the Customs Tariff Schedule. The Customs authorities assessed the goods under sub-heading (2) of Heading 84.41, while the appellants sought re-assessment under sub-heading (1).

2. Distinction between Industrial and Domestic Sewing Machines:
The appellants contended that the horsepower of the motor required for operation was not a relevant criterion for distinguishing between industrial and domestic sewing machines. They argued that the TA-I model, requiring not less than 1/4 HP, was highly efficient and suitable for tailors and dressmakers, thus qualifying as an industrial machine. However, the Customs authorities and the Appellate Collector found the goods inter-changeable with Singer sewing machines model 103-10, typically used as domestic sewing machines.

3. Interpretation of Sub-headings under Heading 84.41:
Shri Sogani argued that even if the TA-I model were considered a domestic sewing machine, its parts should fall under sub-heading (1) rather than (2). He cited Note 2(a) to Section XVI of the Customs Tariff Schedule, emphasizing that only specifically described parts should fall within sub-heading (2). Conversely, Shri Iyer maintained that the classification under sub-heading (2) was correct, referencing Rule 3(c) of the Interpretative Rules, which states that when goods cannot be classified by reference to Rule 3(a) or (b), they should be classified under the heading that occurs latest.

4. Applicability of Indian Standard Specifications and Explanatory Notes to BTN:
The appellants referred to Indian Standard Specifications IS: 6903-1973 and IS: 8892-1978 to argue that rotating hooks were for industrial machines. However, the Bench found these specifications insufficient to conclusively determine the classification. The factual finding that the rotating hooks were inter-changeable with Singer domestic sewing machines was not rebutted by the appellants.

5. Relevance of Previous Judgments and Orders:
Shri Iyer cited a previous Government of India order (1979 Cencus 543-D = 1982 E.L.T. 540A) which classified similar goods under heading 84.41(2). The Tribunal found this order persuasive but noted that several points raised in that case were not argued in the present proceedings.

6. Application of Interpretative Rules for Classification:
The Tribunal examined the Explanatory Notes to BTN and the statement of Objects and Reasons attached to the Customs Tariff Bill, 1974. It concluded that sub-heading (2) of heading 84.41 should cover ordinary sewing machines used in homes or by tailors and dressmakers, while sub-heading (1) would cover machines for special industrial purposes. Given that the TA-I model was suitable for tailors and dressmakers, it fell within the scope of domestic sewing machines under sub-heading (2).

Conclusion:
The Tribunal upheld the classification of the goods under sub-heading (2) of heading 84.41 of the Customs Tariff Schedule, affirming the Appellate Collector's order and rejecting the appeal. The decision was based on the factual finding that the goods were inter-changeable with domestic sewing machines and the interpretative rules favoring the latter sub-heading when both equally merit consideration.