9911796707
TMI Blog1991 (5) TMI 170X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ctor was rejected by the Collector (Appeals) on the grounds that plastic extruders were machine tools classifiable under Heading 84.59 in terms of Note 5 of Chapter 84 of the Customs Tariff, and the imported dies being tools designed for fitment exclusively on such extruders were by virtue of the Explanatory Notes under Heading 82.05 of the CCCN classifiable under sub-heading (1) of Heading 82.05 of C.T.A. 1975. 2. On behalf of the appellants we heard the learned Advocate, Shri R. Santhanam. He stated that the classification of the imported dies for plastic extruders by the department under Customs Tariff Heading 82.05 was not permissible since it covered only interchangeable tools and dies for wire drawing and extrusion dies for metals. He referred to the Explanatory Notes to Heading 82.05 of the CCCN which inter alia states that dies, punches, drills and other interchangeable tools for machines or appliances other than those specified above fall to be classified as parts of the machines or appliances for which they are intended. He claimed that the imported dies were not covered by the items specified in the notes under Heading 82.05 and being parts of extruders for making pl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xplanatory Notes to Heading 82.05 of the CCCN and contended that plastic extruder being a machine tool falling under Heading 84.59, dies meant to be used as parts of such extruders would be interchangeable tools be covered by Heading 82.05. He contended that on the basis of the definition of interchangeability in I.S.O. Guide which was relied upon by the Tribunal in the case of Purewall Associates v. Collector of Customs, Bombay dies for plastic extruders have to be deemed as interchangeable. He argued that the appellants contention that only dies for wire drawing and extrusion dies were covered by Heading 82.05 is erroneous. He contended that the use of the word including before the word dies has the effect of enlarging the scope of the Heading 82.05 so as to include other interchangeable dies as well. In this regard he placed reliance on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax v. Taj Mahal Hotel reported in AIR 1972 S.C. 168. He stated that the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Spaco Carburettors (India) Ltd. v. Collector of Customs, Bombay [1988 (34) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.)] was not relevant since the issue involved in that case related to t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2.05 provided the plastic extruder of which they are parts can be categorised as a machine tool. In this regard the following extracts from the Supreme Court s decision in the case of Spaco Carburettors (India) Ltd. v. Collector of Customs, Bombay (supra) are relevant :- Machine tool, according to Tool Engineers Handbook published by Mc.Graw Hills means any machine operating other than by man power which employs a contact tool for working natural or synthetic material. Mc.Graw Hill Dictionary of Scientific and Technical Terms gives the following meaning :- A stationary power driven machine for the shaping, cutting, turning, boring, drilling, grinding or polishing of solid parts, especially metals. 5. Even according to the Department, machine tools coming under Entry 84.45 are machines used for shaping or surface working metal or metal carbides by either : (i) cutting away or otherwise removing metal of metal carbides (for example, lathes, drilling, plating, slotting, milling or grinding machines). (ii) Changing the shape or form of the metal without removing any of it. The note indicates that machine tools in general remain classified under this heading even if spec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... When the tariff heading says interchangeable tools , it means that the tools should be interchangeable and not that the machine to which they are fitted should be capable of doing multiple jobs. According to the definition appearing in the ISO Guide interchangeability means the suitability of a product to be used in place of another product to fulfil the relevant requirement. When the Department admits that one particular die set can manufacture one particular watch part only, that it cannot do any other job and that no other tool can take its place and do the same job, we fail to understand how such a die set could be classified as an interchangeable tool. 9. It cannot be denied that in the case before us the dies in question were usable only for the manufacture of plastic tape and no other tool could be used to perform the same function or replace it. Hence, on the ratio of the decisions quoted above it has to be held that they were not interchangeable. 10. It has been contended by the appellants that Heading 82.05 covers only two types of dies namely, dies for wire drawing and extrusion dies for metal. On the other hand placing reliance on the Supreme Court s decision in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
