2006 (1) TMI 281

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nt. [Order per : Chittaranjan Satapathy, Member (T)]. Heard both sides. The dispute relates to classification of gears, shafts and gear-boxes. The appellants contend that these goods should be classified under Heading 84.83, whereas it is the contention of the department that the same are classifiable under Heading 87.08 as parts of motor vehicles. The dispute centers around interpretati .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tant case, there is evidence that the impugned goods are not integral parts of engines or motors but are parts of motor vehicles. We also note that the appellants are paying duty on the impugned goods as parts of motor vehicles for the period subsequent to the period in dispute. We also note that in the case of Mahindra Mahindra Ltd. v. Collector of Customs - 1986 (26) E.L.T. 269 (Tri.), Tribuna .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 7.08. As such, we uphold the duty demand against the appellants but allow them to utilize the credit of duty paid by them on these goods under Heading 87.08 when used in further manufacture in their own unit. 4. Consequently, Appeal Nos. E/2030 2031/00 and cross-objection No. E/CO-272/2000 filed by M/s. Telco Ltd. are dismissed and Appeal No. E/2056/2000 filed by the department is allowed in t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X