9911796707
TMI Blog1983 (4) TMI 178X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /s. Jyoti Limited had preferred a claim for refund of duty on the ground that the goods in question viz. High Speed Camera - Dynafax Framing Camera with all accessories would fall under Heading 90.08 of the Customs Tariff Act @ 40% + 5% instead of at 100% + 20% under Heading 90.07 of the Customs Tariff Act. The Assistant Collector of Customs, Air Cargo, Colaba, Bombay, on the basis of the scrutiny of various documents produced, came to the conclusion that the said Dynafax High Speed Camera is correctly classified under CTA 90.07 and not under 90.08. Hence, the refund claim was rejected as being not admissible. 4. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order of the Assistant Collector, the Appellants preferred an appeal to the Appellate Collector ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mera only, he rejected the appeal. 5. In the appeal, the appellants have contested the logic of the reasoning given by the Appellate Collector in negativing their claim for re-assessment under the Heading 90.08 of CTA. 6. Shri Hathi, learned counsel for the appellant argued at great length on the various constructional and functional aspects of the Dynafax High Speed Camera and in doing so he relied upon the catalogues, extracts from which had been made available to the Tribunal. The learned counsel for the appellant took us through the various diagrams and charts by drawing pointed attention to some of the important features which would undoubtedly establish the item in question as Cinematographic camera. In the course of his arguments, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hnical note furnished by him, from being classified as Cinematographic camera if it employs different means to achieve the same function. In the light of the arguments advanced, the learned counsel sought to establish that the Appellate Collector has without any justification based his decision to disqualify the claim of the appellants merely on the basis of the relatively short length of the film handled by the Dynafax Camera and the constructional features. When the Appellate Collector could realise that the functioning of the Dynafax-350 camera is similar to the Cinematographic camera he need not have allowed his decision to be influenced by the absence in the catalogue of any mention of the use of Dynafax camera for Cinematographic purp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s an abbreviated form of cinematograph and in its ordinary signification, would include cine film. One of the meanings of this word as given in the Chambers 20th Century Dictionary is "a building in which photographs or pictures are shown". In other words, even in common parlance, a cinema is equated to a film exhibiting theatre. Shri Iyer also drew attention to the case AIR 1981 SC 1079 wherein the question of the construction of expressions in ordinary commercial parlance as against a purely technical interpretation was discussed. Last but not the least, Shri Raghavan Iyer submitted that in the Collector's Conference held on 11/12th January, 1979, the specific question of classifying Dynafax High Speed Camera-350 came up for consideration ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing eligible for classification under 90.08, if otherwise from the overwhelming similarity of the various features, the said camera satisfies the test. 10. As regards the arguments advanced by the learned Departmental Representative that the Dynafax Camera stand dis-qualified for being classified as a Cinematographic camera due to the absence of the element of "projection" in the said camera, that does not appear to be a sound way of looking at the matter. While in cinematography as such, there would be various stages culminating in 'projection', it would be too tenuous to contend that the absence of one or the other, which in the instant case is the absence of 'projection' should be given that amount of weight as to negative the claim for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... so in the case of 'vegetables'. It would be interesting to recall a pithy observation of Stor in the case of "200 chests of Tea" (1824) 9 Wheaton (US) 43'. Said the judge in that case : "The Legislature does not suppose our merchants to be naturalists, or geologists, or botanists. This would, in a nut-shell, illustrate the circumstances in which rules of construction could be invoked and one rule of construction which would be very relevant and germane in a particular set of circumstances would not apply in a case involving totally different factors and, if so applied may perhaps lead to an absurd result. 11. As for the argument of the learned Departmental Representative about the view taken at the Collector's Conference held in January, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
