9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Classification of "Tablet pressing machines" under Bill of Entry No. DI 97 of 2/3-9-1980. Detailed Analysis: The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, New Delhi involved the classification of "Tablet pressing machines" imported by the Appellants under a specific Bill of Entry. Initially, the machine was classified under Heading 84.59(1), but the Appellants sought re-classification under Heading 84.59(2) asserting that the machine is designed for the production of a commodity. The Assistant Collector and the Appellate Collector rejected this claim, stating that making tablets does not constitute production of a commodity. The Appellants' consultant argued that the machine is a sophisticated unit producing a catalyst used in fertilizer production. He explained that the imported machine is part of a series of machines in a catalyst plant, emphasizing that it indeed produces a commodity, namely, a catalyst. The consultant referred to a previous Tribunal judgment in support of his arguments. On the other hand, the Respondent's representative opposed the arguments, contending that making catalyst pallets does not qualify as production of a commodity under Heading 84.59(2). He relied on a previous Tribunal order to support this stance. After considering both parties' arguments, reviewing relevant judgments, operating instructions, diagrams of the machine, and purchase orders, the Tribunal found that the imported machine, costing around 8 lakhs of Rupees, was crucial for the production of catalyst pallets from catalyst mass. The Tribunal noted that the catalyst manufactured by the Appellants required palletization for utility, and the machine played a vital role in this process. The Tribunal distinguished previous judgments related to the production of commodities, highlighting a case where foam cutting led to marketable products. In this case, the Tribunal concluded that the machine was indeed used in the manufacture of catalyst pallets, as there was a transformation of the useless catalyst mass into usable pallets. Relying on precedent and the specific circumstances of the case, the Tribunal held that the imported machine should be classified under Heading 84.59(2) CTA, allowing the appeal. In conclusion, the Tribunal's decision favored the Appellants, recognizing the imported machine's role in the production of a commodity, specifically catalyst pallets, and directing its correct classification under the relevant heading.
|
