1997 (1) TMI 177 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues: Classification of product - Differential and Ratio Tachometers under Customs Tariff Act

In this judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, New Delhi, the issues revolve around the classification of Differential and Ratio Tachometers under the Customs Tariff Act. The appeals were filed by the Revenue against two separate Orders-in-Appeal passed by the Collector of Customs, Cochin, concerning the classification of the mentioned products. The primary contention was whether the products should be classified under sub-heading No. 9029.20 or Heading No. 98.06 of the Tariff.

The Respondents, M/s. Apollo Tyres Ltd., had imported Differential Tachometers initially classified under sub-heading No. 9029.20 but later revised to Heading No. 98.06 as part of machinery classifiable under Heading No. 84.77 of the Tariff. The Asstt. Collector of Customs held that the Tachometers should be assessed under Heading No. 9806, leading to a short-levy amount. However, the Collector of Customs (Appeals) disagreed and classified the goods under sub-heading No. 9029.20.

The Tribunal analyzed the relevant tariff entries, specifically Chapter 98 of the Customs Tariff, which covers parts of machinery, equipment, and instruments. The Revenue argued that the Tachometers were part of machinery classifiable under Heading No. 84.77, related to machinery for working rubber or plastics. However, based on the product literature, the Tribunal found that the Tachometers were precision instruments used for measuring and controlling variables like speed difference, speed ratio, and percentage stretch or shrink in various industries, indicating they were not part of machinery for working rubber.

Moreover, the Tribunal considered Chapter Note 7 of Chapter 98, which excludes certain parts of machinery from Heading No. 98.06. Referring to Notification No. 130/87-Cus., the Tribunal concluded that the Tachometers did not fall under Heading No. 98.06. Additionally, Chapter 90 of the Tariff covering instruments and apparatus, with sub-heading No. 9029.20 specifically mentioning Tachometers, supported the classification under this sub-heading.

Ultimately, the Tribunal upheld the decision of the Collector of Customs (Appeals) that the Tachometers were rightly classifiable under sub-heading No. 9029.20. Consequently, both appeals filed by the Revenue were rejected, affirming the classification of the products under the mentioned sub-heading.