9911796707
TMI Blog1992 (2) TMI 204X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ort contract under the Project Imports Regulations, 1986. After registration the Customs Authorities allotted the necessary registration number to the contract. Under Notification No. 132/85-Cus., dated 19-4-1985 goods imported for industrial plants and projects falling under Heading No. 98.01 of the First Schedule of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 were exempt from the basic duty of customs in excess of 30%. Multilayer Extruding Machines falling under Chapter 84 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, being specifically covered by Notification No. 125 of 1986, the imported machine was assessed to basic duty of 10% under this notification in preference to the basic duty of 30% that would have been attracted in terms of Notification No ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... res imported along with the machines were assessable under Heading 98.01 as provided under that heading. In support of his arguments, Shri Haksar quoted the following decisions :- 1. Chowgule Matrix Hobs Ltd., Bombay v. Collector of Customs, Bombay reported in 1987 (31) E.L.T. 736 (Tri.) 2. Collector of Customs, Madras v. Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd., Madras reported in 1987 (31) E.L.T. 534 (Tri.) 3. Raman Boards Ltd. v. C. C.E., reported in 1988 (36) E.L.T. 615. 4 Collector of Central Excise v. Balraj Paper and Straw Boards Pvt. Ltd., reported in 1990 (47) E.L.T. 139. 3. On behalf of the Revenue, the learned JDR Shri M.S. Arora, contended that the main machine imported by the appellants was assessed in terms of Notification No. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gistered by the proper officer in accordance with the Project Imports Regulations, 1986. Hence, but for the availment of the concession under Notification No. 125-Cus., dated 17-2-1986 in respect of the imported machine there would have been no dispute as regards the assessment of the machine as well as the accompanying maintenance spares upto 10% of the value of the machine under Heading 98.01 of the Tariff read with Notification No. 132-Cus., dated 19-4-1985 under which goods falling under Heading No. 98.01 were exempt from duty in excess of 45% ad valorem. As seen from the following extract from the Notification No. 132-Cus., dated 19-4-1985 the exemption in respect of any goods covered by the Heading 98.01 which are specified in the Not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... led to the benefit of concessional notification inasmuch as we do not see any express or implied restriction in the said notification. The Appellate Collector had certainly gone wrong in rejecting the appeal on a totally new ground, and, in any case, that view is also not sustainable, as the law stands, in view of the clear provisions of Section 15(l)(b) of the Customs Act. 6. In the case of Collector of Customs, Madras v. Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd., Madras reported in 1987 (31) E.L.T. 534, the Tribunal had once again held that concessional assessment under Project Import Regulations does not act as a bar to the availment of concession under any other Notification unless it is barred categorically. Paragraph 5 of this decision being r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... du Newsprint Papers Ltd. reported in 1988 (36) E.L.T. 272 in which it was held that Heading 84.66 of the Tariff relating to Project Imports could not be deemed as a general heading and in respect of Paper making machinery and component parts thereof imported in terms of a contract registered as per Heading No. 84.66 relating to Project Imports an importer would not be entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 62/83-Cus., dated 1-3-1983 which specifically exempted Paper making machinery and component parts thereof falling under Heading 84.31 from the auxiliary duty payable thereon. 8. As observed by the Hon ble High Court, it is well settled that when an exemption notification refers specifically to any Heading of the tariff and descript ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nder Heading 84.31 would be applicable for determining the auxiliary duty leviable on paper making machinery and component parts thereof when goods falling under Heading 84.66 were specifically mentioned under Notification No. 61/83. Since the goods falling under Heading No. 84.66 were specifically figuring in Notification No. 61/83, it was correctly held by the High Court that auxiliary duty on the goods was leviable in terms of this Notification. 9. In view of the above discussion, we are of the view that the Multilayer Extruding Machine imported by the appellants in accordance with the Project Import Regulations, 1986 has to be deemed as covered by the Project Import Heading 98.01 even though it was assessed at the concessional rate of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
