1997 (3) TMI 171

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... flow detector mentioned at Serial No. 10 of Notification No. 97/89-Cus., concessional rate of duty applied. The Assistant Collector rejected the claim holding that battery cells were not parts but consumables. The Collector appeals upheld the lower order. Hence this appeal. 2. The case for the appellants was argued by Shri S.S. Gupta, Chartered Accountant. Revenue was represented by Shri K.K. Jha, Senior Departmental Representative. 3. Shri Gupta stated that there is no definition of parts in the Tariff referring to the CEGAT order in the case of Electrosteel Castings Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, reported in 1989 (43) E.L.T. 305 (Tribunal) he stated that a component, whose absence will disable a machine or appliance, must be .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ts or accessories of computers. Referring to the judgment of the Bombay High Court in the case of Koron Business Systems Ltd. v. Union of India, reported in 1991 (51) E.L.T. 212 (Bom.), he argued that where certain accessories could be purchased separately by the customers as per their needs, they did not become essential parts of the machine. He stated that in the case of Wipro Infotech Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, Bangalore, reported in 1994 (69) E.L.T. 82 (Tribunal), the Tribunal held that a ribbon used in a computer printer was an accessory and was not an inputs quantifying under the Modvat. In the case of Masters Medical Equipment v. Collector of Customs, New Delhi, reported in 1995 (80) E.L.T. 101 (Tribunal) = 1995 (59) ECR 3 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... neral aspects, the citations made by Shri Jha are specific. The judgment of the Supreme Court is most relevant. In dealing with the questions whether a typewriter ribbon is a part of the typewriter, citing with approval the Mysore High Court decision in the case of Mysore in State of Mysore v. Kores (India) Ltd., Apex Court has held : Regarding ribbon also to which the above-mentioned rule of construction equally applies, we have no manner of doubt that it is an accessory and not a part of the typewriter (unlike spool) though it may not be possible to use the latter without the former. Just as aviation petrol is not a part of the aeroplane nor diesel is a part of a bus, in the same way, ribbon is not a part of the typewriter though it ma .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X