1997 (3) TMI 205 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Denial of concessional rate of duty on Automatic Ice Cream Filling Machine.
2. Interpretation of whether the imported goods qualify as check weighing volumetric fillers.
3. Consideration of examination report versus catalogue description.
4. Relevance of Import Trade Control Policy in customs classification.

Analysis:
The appeal challenged the denial of concessional duty rates on an Automatic Ice Cream Filling Machine imported under a specific Bill of Entry. The appellants claimed that the machine was a check weighing volumetric filler essential for filling and packing ice cream into cups, falling under Sl. No. 22 of Notification No. 125/86. The Advocate argued that the machine's functions, as per literature and examination report, supported its classification as a check weighing volumetric filler.

The Revenue contended that the catalogue did not clearly demonstrate the machine's working principle or the presence of a check weighing mechanism. They highlighted the issuance of a specific ITC license for the import, suggesting that the goods were not exempt under the Notification. The Tribunal noted the Assistant Collector's acknowledgment of the examination report confirming the machine as a check weighing volumetric filler, despite doubts raised based on the catalogue.

The Tribunal emphasized the significance of the examination report over the catalogue description. They cited a previous Tribunal order rejecting invoice evidence in favor of a specific examination report. The literature provided by the Advocate detailed the machine's functions related to proportioning and volumetric pumping, reinforcing the argument that it qualified as a check weighing volumetric filler.

Regarding the ITC license, the Advocate argued that its issuance should not affect the customs classification process, especially when the examination report aligned with the exemption criteria under Notification No. 125/86. The Tribunal agreed, stating that the ability to import under OGL did not negate the machine's classification as a check weighing volumetric filler. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed, granting the concessional duty rates to the appellants.