9911796707
|
Home
Issues: Classification of imported machinery under sub-heading (1) or sub-heading (2) of Heading 84.40 of C.T.A., 1975
In this judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CEGAT NEW DELHI, the issue at hand was the classification of machinery imported by the appellants under sub-heading (1) or sub-heading (2) of Heading 84.40 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1975. The appellants argued that the imported machinery, which included a Steam Press with a portable boiler along with steam ironing and cleaning tables, should be classified under sub-heading (1) as "Not elsewhere specified" since it was Industrial laundry and dry-cleaning machinery. On the other hand, the lower authorities had classified the machinery under sub-heading (2) which covers Domestic Washing machine, laundry, and dry-cleaning machinery. The appellants contended that the use of the word "Domestic" in sub-heading (2) of Heading 84.40 qualified not only washing machines but also laundry and dry-cleaning machinery. They argued that the punctuation used in the tariff was significant, and since only a comma separated "Domestic Washing machine" from "laundry and dry-cleaning machinery," it implied that the term "Domestic" applied to all three categories. However, the Departmental Representative argued that the inclusion of laundry and dry-cleaning machinery within brackets in the main part of Heading 84.40 meant that the heading encompassed all types of machinery, whether domestic or not. They asserted that the word "Domestic" did not qualify laundry and dry-cleaning machinery, and the intention of the Government was not to limit it to domestic machinery. The Tribunal analyzed the arguments presented by both parties and concluded that the word "Domestic" in sub-heading (2) of Heading 84.40 did not qualify laundry and dry-cleaning machinery. They emphasized that interpreting the tariff based on punctuation alone could lead to absurd results, as it would imply the existence of domestic laundry and dry-cleaning machinery, which was not known to exist. Since the appellants had imported Industrial laundry and dry-cleaning machinery, the lower authorities' classification under sub-heading (2) was deemed appropriate. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, upholding the classification under sub-heading (2) of Heading 84.40.
|
