1989 (10) TMI 189 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
- Claim for duty-free assessment under Notification No. 227/79-Cus.
- Interpretation of the term "Fixtures" under the notification.
- Whether the imported PVC tiles qualify for duty exemption under the notification.
- Compliance with conditions for duty exemption.
- Justification of the Collector (Appeals) decision.

Analysis:
1. The case involved the import of PVC tiles by the respondents for use in their unit in the SEEPZ Export Processing Zone, claiming duty-free assessment under Notification No. 227/79-Cus. The Deputy Collector disallowed the exemption, stating the tiles did not qualify as being imported in connection with manufacturing or promotional activity.

2. The Advocate for the respondents argued that the tiles were necessary for creating a dust-free atmosphere for video cassette recording, thus meeting the conditions of the notification. He referenced a letter from the Assistant Development Commissioner allowing the import of "Vinyl Rubberised Floor Sheets" under certain conditions. The dispute centered on whether the tiles fell under the category of "Fixtures" in the notification.

3. Serial number 6 of the notification listed permissible items as "Tools, Jigs, Gauges, Fixtures, Moulds, Dies, Instruments, and Accessories" for duty-free import within the SEEPZ. The Collector (Appeals) accepted the claim that the tiles improved acoustic qualities and maintained a dust-free atmosphere, crucial for the high-fidelity video cassette manufacturing process, thus granting duty exemption.

4. The Advocate contended that the tiles qualified as fixtures based on the definition from the Concise Oxford Dictionary. The Assistant Development Commissioner's permission and a letter highlighting the need for a dust-free environment in the electronics industry supported the respondents' claim. The Tribunal found no reason to overturn the Collector (Appeals) decision due to the lack of a clear definition of "fixture" in the notification.

5. Ultimately, the Tribunal upheld the Collector (Appeals) decision, dismissing the Revenue's appeal. The judgment favored the respondents' interpretation of the notification, considering the necessity of a dust-free environment for their manufacturing process.