Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1996 (10) TMI 243

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... a machines designed for the production of a commodity) and Heading 84.59(1) (not elsewhere specified). 3. The authorities have classified Auto Sewing Lines i.e. one machine of the above set under Heading 84.59(2) and there is no dispute about it. But they have classified the other machine of the set namely the printing tubing machine under Heading 84.59(1) as `not elsewhere specified on the ground that it is not used for producing any READY TO USE commodity. 4. It was their contention that the two machines together constitute a set for manufacture of cement bags. A part of the job upto the cut tubes stage is done by the printing tubing machine and the second part namely the stitching is done by the second machine and then only the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tioned in the tariff, resort cannot be had to the residuary item. In this regard the Apex Court relied on the earlier decision in the case of Bharat Forge and Press Industries v. CCE - 1990 (45) E.L.T. 525. 7. Even if the machines have independent functions and are not on common base, they have to be treated as one and not to be classified as individual items. This is the ratio laid down by the Hon ble Tribunal in the case of Milkfood Industries v. CCE - 1994 (71) E.L.T. 549 (Tribunal) = 1994 (53) ECR 98. Similar view was expressed by the Tribunal in the case of Modern Food Industries (I) Ltd. v. CC - 1991 (53) E.L.T. 107. Hence, the fact that there are two machines which can independently function is not fatal to the classification whe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e been imported vide B/E in question. Assessment is sought under 84.59(2) of CTA, 1975. These machines are used in the manufacturing of Cement bags. The process of manufacturing is as follows :- (1) Laminated PP Woven fabric is fed to the printing and tubing machine Model CTM-D3N. In this machine the following operations take place - (a) The fabric is printed in 2/3 colours (b) The printing is dried by heat (c) The printed PP woven fabric along with inner lines kraft paper is fed to the stripe pasting unit where the craft paper is tripe pasted to the laminated PP woven fabric by adhesive. (d) This stripe pasted material goes on the tubing unit where as continuous tube is formed and such tube has a overlap joint. (e) Next, the ov .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... y are selling the cuttings to various parties who get the valves formed by hand and also get it stitched in their Sewing lines, so that proper sewing of the bag cut-pieces can be done in their plant itself. This would inter alia, mean that the machines, in question, are not inseparable and are not integrated with each other. Hence, the assessment under 84.59(2), as a complete unit is ruled out. 12. As regards the assessment on merits, there is, no doubt, that the printing tubing machine is not producing any ready-to-use commodity. At best it is performing an individual function, which is not specified elsewhere. In view of this position the correct assessment for this would be 84.59(1), CTA, 1975. 13. Ld. DR also drew attention towards .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... laminated with paper/glued to paper and tube form and the back made therefrom under T.I. 68 and therefore their alternative prayer was that on this ground also the item in question would merit classification under 84.59(2). 16. We have considered the above submissions. We observe that both the A.C. and the ld. Collector (Appeals) have found that the two machines imported by them together are two different machines which are nowhere described as part of the complete system in the manufacturer s catalogue. They have been described separately in separate leaflets and the invoice also does not mention them as a system. This is important. Admittedly the second machine is being used for production of tubing. Such tubings may be bought and sold .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... and each one is required to be assessed on its own merits. That they can also be used even in a complementary way does not alter this basic fact. The case law cited by the appellants does not help them because in each one of these orders the tribunal has come to conclusion on the facts of the given case that the machine was capable of being used for production of a commodity. Thus, for example in the case of Project and Development India - 1989 (42) E.L.T. 98 (Tribunal), the Tribunal found that the machine was used for production of catalyst pallets etc. and in the case of National Small Industries - 1988 (36) E.L.T. 367 (Tribunal) it was found that the machine produced a commodity called laminated boards and in the case of [Coates] India - .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates