1994 (2) TMI 162

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d, none has appeared on behalf of the appellants. Vide their telegram received on 23-12-1993, they have desired that their case be decided on the basis of the papers already submitted by them. Accordingly, we have heard the ld, SDR Shri M.K. Jain for the Revenue. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are as follows : The appellants herein are manufacturers of milking machine under Tariff Ite .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... llate authority allowed the application of the Revenue and held the product as falling under Tariff Item 40. Hence, this appeal. 3. The appellants in their Appeal Memo have submitted that the trolley is nothing but a mobile base for milking machine and cannot serve as an article of furniture. It is neither designed nor it can give any comfort to human being and has no qualities of furnishing any .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... td. was meant for air coolers which are required to be kept in the residential houses or office premises or business premises. Trolley therefore is an accessory, an item of convenience and comfort to human beings. It can therefore be treated as an item of furniture as has been done by the Punjab Haryana High Court. In the present case, the trolley is a part of dairy industry where it is required .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X