9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (9) TMI 238X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... filed the claim for refund on the ground that the goods were liable to be assessed to duty under CTA, 76.08/16. 3. Arguing for the appellants, the learned DR submits that the goods were connecting rod forgings for motor cycles. The goods had already been in the shape of finished articles and the fact that certain operations like drilling, grindings, facing, fixing a bush etc. were subsequently carried out would not take them out of the category of finished articles in terms of Interpretative Rule 2(a). In this connection he cites in support the case of Collector of Customs, Bombay v. Bajaj Auto Ltd., and Final Order No. C/28-35/94-B2 which relied on earlier order of the Tribunal in the case of Bajaj Auto Ltd. v. Collector of Customs as re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ting rods; they were only rough forgings of aluminium and nothing more. The fact that they had no other commercial use except processing into finished part of machinery was not considered determination of the issue in that case. While arriving at this conclusion the Tribunal relied on an earlier order in the case of same appellants in Order No. 537/86-B, dated 17-6-1986. We find that in an earlier Order No. 537/86-B2, dated 17-6-1986, the Tribunal had examined in detail the various operations to which the goods were subjected. The operations were drilling, turning, spot facing etc. 6. The circumstances under which the goods have to be examined with reference to provisions of Rule 2(a) came up for detailed examination before the larger ben ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . The Tribunal agreed with the findings in the light of various judgments cited before the Tribunal. 8. It is true that the Tribunal in the case of Bajaj Auto Ltd. - Order Nos. C/28-35/94-B2 held that connecting rod forgings had attained the character of finished goods. In case of Madras Luka Steel - Order No. C/193/95 the Tribunal had examined the case of Bajaj Auto Ltd. and in the light of various judgments discussed in that order had come to the conclusion that the decision in the case of Bajaj Auto Ltd. was distinguishable. We find that there had been series of decisions in case specifically for the respondents themselves where the Tribunal after examination of samples of connecting rods found that the goods as imported had not attain ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
