1986 (5) TMI 191 - AT - Customs

Issues Involved:
1. Classification of Toyobo Printing Plates.
2. Classification of Graphic Art Films.
3. Classification of R.C. Paper.
4. Levy of Countervailing Duty (CV duty) on goods not produced or manufactured in India.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Classification of Toyobo Printing Plates:

The primary issue was whether Toyobo Printing Plates should be classified under Heading 37.01/08 as assessed by the Revenue or under Heading 84.34 as claimed by the appellants. The Tribunal noted that the essential nature and characteristic of the Printing Plates is that of printing plates and their employment of the photographic principle does not detract from this characteristic. The plates are exclusively used in the printing industry and known as printing plates. The Tribunal emphasized that the plates should be classified in the sense understood by those dealing with them, which would be under Heading 84.34 of CTA as printing plates. The Tribunal rejected the reliance on CCCN notes by the Revenue, stating that these notes have persuasive value but are not part of the CTA 1975. The Tribunal concluded that the more appropriate classification for the Toyobo Printing Plates is under Heading 84.34 and not Heading 37.01/08 of CTA.

2. Classification of Graphic Art Films:

The appellants argued that Graphic Art Films are lithographic films, different from photographic films, and should not be classified under Chapter 37. The Tribunal, however, upheld the classification under Chapter 37 by the lower authorities. The Tribunal noted that the description of the Graphic Art Films in the import policy and the specific application of Chapter 37 to these articles made this classification more appropriate than Heading 84.34.

3. Classification of R.C. Paper:

The appellants contended that R.C. Paper is photo type setting paper, different from photographic paper used in photography, and should not be classified under Chapter 37. The Tribunal upheld the classification under Chapter 37 by the lower authorities, noting that the specific application of Chapter 37 to these articles was more appropriate than Heading 84.34.

4. Levy of Countervailing Duty (CV duty):

The appellants argued that no additional duty should be chargeable as the goods are not manufactured or produced in India. The Tribunal rejected this argument, citing the decision in Khandelwal Metal & Engg. Works Ltd. v. Union of India -1985 (20) E.L.T. 222, which held that the levy of CV duty is justified even if the goods are not produced or manufactured in India.

Conclusion:

The Tribunal concluded that the Toyobo Printing Plates are properly classifiable under Heading 84.34 of CTA, 1975, and set aside their classification under Chapter 37.01/08. The classification of Graphic Art Films and R.C. Paper under Chapter 37 was upheld. The argument against the levy of additional duty was rejected. The appeals were thus partly allowed, providing consequential relief to the appellants.

← Previous Next →