1989 (5) TMI 169 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues: Classification of "Synthetic Condensor Rubbing Aprons" under Customs Tariff Act, 1975.

The judgment concerns the classification of "Synthetic Condensor Rubbing Aprons" under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The appellants imported the goods and claimed classification under heading No. 1984.37(1) as parts of textile machinery, while the department classified them under heading No. 40.05/16 as rubber articles. The main issue is whether the goods should be classified as parts of carding machines or as rubber articles, impacting the duty charged and the appellants' claim for a duty refund.

The appellants argued that the goods are parts of carding machines, supported by evidence such as a leaflet on "Condenser Rubbers" and a write-up by "WIRA - Technology and Productivity services for the Wool Textile Industry." The Department did not dispute that the goods are parts of carding machines. The appellants relied on an Australian Tribunal decision regarding windscreen wiper blade refills to support their classification under heading No. 1984.37.

The Departmental Representative cited a previous decision by the Tribunal in M.J. Woollen Mills (P) Ltd. v. Collector of Customs, Bombay, to support the department's classification under heading 40.05/16. The Tribunal noted that the goods in the Woollen Mills case were rubber aprons made of synthetic rubber, classified under heading 40.05/16(1) due to the exclusion of parts of machinery made of rubber from Section XVI.

The Tribunal analyzed the Australian Tribunal's decision on windscreen wiper blade refills and concluded that it was not applicable to the present case. While windscreen wiper blades were not considered goods used for industrial purposes, the synthetic condenser rubbing aprons, being parts of carding machines, were excluded from heading 1984.37 by Note 1(a) to Section XVI, leading to their classification under heading 40.05/16.

Ultimately, the Tribunal upheld the lower authorities' classification of the subject goods under heading 40.05/16(1) and dismissed the appeal, emphasizing the exclusion of parts of machinery made of rubber from the scope of Section XVI.