9911796707
TMI Blog1988 (7) TMI 303X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are the essential functions of these items, that these are components of mining and project machinery and, that therefore, they should fall under the residuary Item No. 68 CET. 2. The factual aspects, as stated above, are admitted by the department. However they have taken the stand that the impugned goods are ultimately used as fasteners , thereby qualifying for assessment under Tariff Item 52. 3. None appears on behalf of the appellants who have requested that their appeal may be decided on the basis of their written submissions. We have heard Shri G.V. Naik, Joint Chief Departmental Representative on behalf of the department. 4. The learned Jt. C.D.R. reiterates the views taken by the Collector (Appeals). The Collector (Appeals) h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efore it could come to any conclusion as regards classification. The learned Collector (Appeals) in his order admits that there is absence of any evidence/technical citation to explain the salient features of each part and their functions. After referring to what he calls absolute lack of evidence , he comes to the conclusion that the specific entry is to be preferred to a general entry. Accordingly, he upholds the order of the lower authority classifying the goods under Central Excise Tariff Item No. 52 instead of Item No. 68. This is not tenable. The appellants have claimed as sessment of the goods under Tariff Item 68. They have also shown that the goods are manufactured entirely to the specification of M/s. B.E.M.L. K.G.F. to whom they ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not under Tariff Item 34A or Tariff Item 68 even prior to amendment of Tariff Item 34A on 10-5-1979. 8. The broad issue of classification of nuts and bolts essentially used as fasteners has come in for consideration in other orders of this Tribunal, notably, Sri Ramdas Motor Transport Ltd. (1983 (14) E.L.T. 2067) Sundaram Fasteners Ltd. (1985 Vol. 22 E.L.T. 923), Madras Engineering Industries (P) Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, Madras (Order No. 169/86-D, dated 27-3-1986) and M/s. Sikands Ltd. Faridabad (Haryana) v. Collector of Central Excise, Delhi (Order No. 162/87-D, dated 27-2-1987). The argument in those cases was that while it was admitted that the nuts in question were essentially fasteners but they had other functional utili ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the fact that the goods in question were specially designed as per specifications required, keeping in view the special functions of the spring assembly as a part of automobile. 10. The view taken in M/s. New Mangalore Engineering Co. (P) Ltd. has been confirmed in the order of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Ashok Leylands Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, Madras (Order No. 348/87-D, dated 19-10-1987). 11. We would like to refer here to the decision of the High Court of Karnataka in the case of Ideal Jawa (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Assistant Collector of Central Excise, IDO, Mysore and Others - 1986 (24) E.L.T. 226. The impugned products in that case were bolts, nuts and rods, but since they were of special type specifically manufact ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
