1989 (11) TMI 168 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
Eligibility for benefit of Notification No. 243/78-Cus., dated 26-12-1978 for goods designed for testing purposes in the automotive industry.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Issue of Eligibility for Benefit of Notification: The primary issue in this appeal before the Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, New Delhi, was the eligibility of the appellant for the benefit of Notification No. 243/78-Cus., dated 26-12-1978, which grants a concessional rate of duty to goods falling under Chapter 90 of the Customs Tariff Act designed for testing purposes in the automotive industry.

2. Facts and Decision: The appellant imported noise and vibration measuring and analyzing equipment, claiming it was designed for testing purposes in the automotive industry. However, the Deputy Collector rejected the claim stating the equipment was for general purposes, including use in automotive industries. The Collector (Appeals) upheld this decision, emphasizing that the goods served more purposes than just testing in the automobile industry.

3. Arguments Presented: The appellant argued that the goods were indeed designed for testing purposes in the automotive industry and should be eligible for the benefit of the notification. The appellant's consultant and the Department's representative presented their arguments before the Tribunal.

4. Catalogue Evidence: The catalogue submitted by the appellant showed that the testing equipment had alternate applications beyond automotive industries, such as architectural acoustics. The Deputy Collector acknowledged the automotive industry use but denied the benefit due to the equipment's general-purpose nature.

5. Legal Precedents: The Tribunal referred to previous cases to support its decision. It cited cases where machinery capable of multiple functions still qualified for exemptions under similar notifications, emphasizing that versatility did not disqualify the equipment from the benefit.

6. Tribunal's Decision: After considering the arguments, evidence, and legal precedents, the Tribunal concluded that the appellant was indeed eligible for the benefit of the notification. It held that the equipment's multipurpose nature did not negate its primary design for testing in the automotive industry, overturning the previous decisions and allowing the appeal with consequential relief.

7. Final Verdict: The Tribunal set aside the earlier orders, ruling in favor of the appellant's eligibility for the benefit under Notification No. 243/78-Cus., dated 26-12-1978, based on the equipment's primary design for testing purposes in the automotive industry, despite its versatility for general applications.