1996 (2) TMI 246 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Classification of imported goods under the correct Customs Tariff Heading (CTH).
2. Applicability of Chapter Notes 4 and 5 of Chapter 49.
3. Relevance of previous Tribunal decisions.
4. Determination of whether the imported goods are technical documents or trade catalogues.
5. Assessment of duty-free status under Notification No. 23/91-Cus.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Classification of Imported Goods under the Correct Customs Tariff Heading (CTH):
The primary issue was whether the imported goods, described as "technical designs and drawings," should be classified under CTH 4901.99, 4906.00, or 4911.91. The appellant claimed classification under CTH 4906.00 or 4901.99, arguing that the goods were technical documents. The Department contended that the goods were classifiable under CTH 4911.91, which pertains to "Other printed matter, including printed pictures and photographs."

2. Applicability of Chapter Notes 4 and 5 of Chapter 49:
Chapter Note 4 specifies that "printed pictures or illustrations not bearing a text, whether in the form of signatures or separate sheets, fall in Heading No. 49.11." Chapter Note 5 states that Heading No. 49.01 does not cover publications essentially devoted to advertising, which should be classified under Heading No. 49.11. The Department argued that the goods did not meet the criteria for classification under CTH 4901.99 or 4906.00 as they were not hand-drawn or original drawings.

3. Relevance of Previous Tribunal Decisions:
The appellant cited the Tribunal's decisions in the cases of Roto Ink (P) Ltd. and United Glass and Bottles Manufacturing Company Ltd. In Roto Ink, it was held that technical documents in loose leaf binders are not trade catalogues and should be classified under Heading 4901.99. In United Glass, the Tribunal concluded that the term "plans" includes "drawings." The Department argued that these cases were distinguishable from the present case, as the goods in question were not technical documents but rather printed matter.

4. Determination of Whether the Imported Goods are Technical Documents or Trade Catalogues:
The Tribunal examined the nature of the imported goods, which included design specifications and process control techniques. The goods were found to be printed and not hand-drawn, and they were not in the form of trade catalogues. The Tribunal concluded that the imported goods were technical documents intended for use in modifications and improvements at the appellant's cement plant.

5. Assessment of Duty-Free Status under Notification No. 23/91-Cus:
The appellant claimed duty-free assessment under CTH 4906.00, which was contested by the Department. The Tribunal found that the goods did not meet the criteria for classification under CTH 4906.00, as they were not hand-drawn or original drawings. However, the Tribunal concluded that the goods were technical documents and should be classified under CTH 4901.99, which could potentially qualify for duty-free status under the relevant notification.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal held that the imported goods, being technical documents in loose leaf kept in folders and consisting of specifications for process control systems and design techniques, should be classified under CTH 4901.99. The appeal was allowed, and the classification under CTH 4911.91 by the Department was set aside. The Tribunal emphasized that the goods were not in the nature of other printed matters, including printed pictures or photographs, and thus did not fall under the residuary heading of 4911.91.