9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (6) TMI 296X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n under Heading No. 83.06 was sought by the appellants. The Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) examined the sample of the disputed goods and referred to the Section/Chapter Notes under the Tariff, and after examining the competing tariff entries, he held that the classification under sub-heading No. 7015.00 was appropriate. 2. The matter was posted for hearing on 31-3-1998, when Shri Naveen Mullick, Advocate, pleaded that the expression or the like in Heading No. 90.03 of the Tariff was wide enough to cover the classification of the photo frames in question under sub-heading No. 9003.19 of the Tariff. He referred to the Heading No. 90.03 of the Tariff which covered frames and mountings for spectacles, goggles or the like, and parts thereof. He referred to the Supreme Court decision in the case of Pardeep Aggarbatti v. State of Punjab, 1997 (96) E.L.T. 219 (S.C.), wherein the Apex Court had held that when some articles are grouped together in an entry, then each word in the entry draws colour from the other words therein, on the principle of noscitur a sociis. 3. In reply, Shri Satnam Singh, SDR, submitted that the photo frames were essentially made of glass and other aids ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on that the photo frame was akin to frame and mountings for spectacles and goggles. The case before the Hon ble Supreme Court was related to the provisions under the Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948. The issue for consideration was, whether dhoop and aggarbatti were covered by the expression perfumery . In para 9 of their order, the Apex Court had observed that the entries in the Schedules of Sales Tax and Excise statutes list some articles separately and some articles are grouped together. When they are grouped together each word in the Entry draws colour from the other words therein. The Apex Court had referred to this principle as the principle of noscitur a sociis. This principle is not applicable in the facts and circumstances of the case as the photo frames had not been grouped along with the frames and mountings for spectacles and goggles. The Supreme Court in para 10 of their decision had held as under : 10. We are in no doubt whatever that the word perfumery" in the said Entry No. 16 draws colour from the words `cosmetics and `toilet goods therein and that, so read, the word `perfumery in the said Entry No. 16 can only refer to such articles of perfumery as are u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ading No. 70.20 of the Harmonised Commodity Description and Coding System Explanatory Notes (HSN) in respect of other articles of glass. 11. The function of an article is one of the most important criteria for determining the essential character of an article. The factors which determine the essential character of a composite product may vary as between different kinds of goods. Among the various factors, the dominant purpose for which the possession of the composite item is craved, may be relevant. The value of one or the other component may be determinative of the price paid, but it may not be the sole consideration for which a buyer goes to the market to possess the goods in question. The functional character of the composite article is also determined by the convenience it provides to the user, in the present case by the curved glass which meets the basic requirement of display of the photograph, picture etc. While dealing with the glass mirror, the Hon ble Supreme Court in para 8 of their judgment in the case of Atul Glass Indus. Ltd. v. CCE, 1986 (25) E.L.T. 473 (S.C.), had held as under : ₹ 8. The test commonly applied to such cases is: How is the product identifie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tive intention when the statute was enacted. That was also the view expressed in Geep Flashlight Industries Ltd. v. Union of India and Others - 1985 (22) E.L.T. 3. Where the goods are not marketable that principle of construction is not attracted. Indian Aluminium Cables Ltd. v. Union of India and others - (1985) 3 S.C.C. 284 = 1985 (21) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.). The question whether thermometers, lactometers, syringes, eye-wash glasses and measuring glasses could be described as `glassware for the purpose of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 was answered by the Orissa High Court in State of Orissa v. Janta Medical Stores - (1976) 37 STC 33 in the negative. To the same effect is the decision of this Court in Indo International Industries v. Commissioner of Sales Tax, Uttar Pradesh, (1981) 3 S.C.R. 294 = 1981 E.L.T. 325 (S.C.), where hypodermic clinical syringes were regarded as falling more accurately under the entry relating to hospital equipment, and apparatus rather than under the entry which related to glasswares in the U.P. Sales Tax Act. This decision was rended by the Supreme Court under the old Central Excise Tariff. Under the new Central Excise Tariff glass mirrors were spe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
