9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (8) TMI 755X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... T Lead Acid Storage Batteries and claimed assessment under CTH 8479.89 read with Customs Notification 20/99 at the concessional rate of duty. The Commissioner has set aside the original authority s order to assess the goods independently as each machine and equipment was having individual functions and are assessable as each machine on merits and had denied the benefit of the said notification. Respondents had only relied on some materials i.e. technical write up, (which is not signed by any body), Line Processing sheet and Group assembly line chart (not signed by any body) and claimed classification under sub-heading 8479.89 and the benefit of the notification. 2. Revenue is aggrieved with this order and have contended that all the items ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ined function covered by one of the headings in Chapter 84 or Chapter 85, and to be classified under the heading appropriate to that function. It is stated that heading 84.79 refers to machines and mechanical appliances having individual functions not specified or included elsewhere in this chapter and sub-heading 8479.89 refers to residuary heading Other . It is stated that each of the machines are specified in various headings and individual values have not been mentioned in the Bill of Entry and therefore, invocation of Section 19 of Customs Act is justified. It has also been stated that in the Order-in-Original, each description of the machines has been taken including its individual function and also the fact that they are not working ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oduction of the commodity and without use of other machineries for production of the batteries. It is also stated that the importers have not furnished individual values of those machines/equipments though all those machines are specifically mentioned in the packing list and the corresponding write up given by them. Therefore, invocation of Section 19 of the Customs Act for determination of duty is justified. 4. We have heard ld. DR Shri A. Jayachandran for the Revenue and Shri G. Shivadass, ld. Advocate for the respondents. 5. Ld. DR took us through the entire records and the orders of both the authorities and pointed out that the Commissioner has relied on the same flow chart and the write up which is inconclusive for the purpose of c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inery for classification under Chapter 84. He also relies on the judgment of Milk Food Ltd v. CC, New Delhi - 1994 (71) E.L.T. 549 (T). 7. Countering the argument, ld. DR points out that both the above judgments relied upon by the Counsel are not applicable to the facts of this case as the technical literature and enormous evidence had been produced to show that all the machines are working in conjunction for the production of final product, while in the case of Lakhanpal National Ltd. (supra), it was found that all the machines had not been imported for production of the final commodity and hence the ratio of the cited judgments clearly apply to the facts of this case, and seeks for reversal of the Commissioner (Appeals) order. 8. On a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... their examining the machinery while functioning, it is not proper to accept the findings of the both the authorities. The classification has to be adopted in terms of Section Notes 3 to 5 of Section XVI and the only residuary machineries which are not finding any place in any of the chapter headings would fall under the Heading 8479.89. In this case, the Commissioner (Appeals) has not noticed the individual function and has also not found any material evidence about all the machineries working in conjunction. On a prima facie consideration, we find some merit in the order-in-original because the flow chart also shows only the each unit being kept in one section, but whether the machineries placed in those sections i.e. columns or squares s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was no dispute in those cases about the entire machinery being imported in CKD condition and installed in a composite fashion and they were all working in conjunction for production of final product. This case may be decided only after due verification and as the Commissioner has not done so, but accepted the flow chart as sufficient evidence, we are of the considered opinion that the order of the Commissioner cannot be accepted for the reason that the issue has not been examined in the light of Section Notes 3 4 of Section XVI. The ground taken by the Revenue is justified. In that view of the matter, the impugned order is set aside and matter remanded to the original authority for de novo consideration in the light of observations made ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
