1997 (2) TMI 206 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Concessional rate of basic customs duty under Notification 109/86-Cus.
2. Concessional rate of duty for auxiliary duty under Notification No. 187/86.

Analysis:
The appeal was against the Order of the Collector of Customs (Appeals) regarding the concessional rate of duty for an automatic film developing and printing machine imported by the appellants. The authorities rejected the claims stating that the concessional rate of duty was only applicable to automatic film processors for the printing industry, not photographic studios.

The advocate for the appellants argued that the notification did not specify a requirement for use in the printing industry for auxiliary duty. The Revenue contended that the automatic processors used in photo studios did not qualify as being used in the printing industry.

The Tribunal considered the case law cited by the appellants but noted that the current notification referred to "automatic film processors for use in printing industry," which has a specific meaning. The Tribunal found that even though the photos taken are called prints, a photographic studio does not qualify as a printing industry. Therefore, the appeal for concessional rate of basic customs duty under Notification 109/86 was rejected.

Regarding the auxiliary duty claim, the Tribunal found that the notification for auxiliary duty did not have a requirement for use in the printing industry. Since the impugned goods were automatic film processors and the notification granted exemption without conditions on the manner of use, the Tribunal accepted the appellants' contention for exemption from auxiliary duty.

In conclusion, the Tribunal rejected the claim for concessional rate of basic customs duty under Notification 109/86 but allowed the claim for partial exemption from auxiliary duty under Notification 187/86. The appellants were entitled to consequential relief as per the law. The appeal was disposed of accordingly.