9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (4) TMI 415X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mported a scanner and a processor and filed bill of entry dated 11-8-1997 for clearance of the goods, claiming classification of the goods under SH 8443.60 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act. The assessing authority classified the goods under SH 9010.49. The assessee preferred an appeal to the Commissioner (Appeals) for reassessment of the goods under SH 8442.30 and for refund of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... c industries. This claim of the appellants is not supported by any evidence. Had they produced the manufacturer s catalogue/literature on the machines, it would have been possible for us to examine the veracity of the above claim. It is submitted by the appellants that Heading 84.42 is more specific for the subject goods which are claimed to have been used exclusively in printing industry. It is s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ork when the same is scanned, segregates them as the combination of four print colours and outputs them on films. These films when processed and transferred to the printing plate will facilitate a colourful end product. The pictures that are exposed on film are brought to view with the developing in the processor. They submit that these are specifically designed for use in the printing industry an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ewhere in Chapter 90. It appears from the nature of operations of the goods narrated by the assessee themselves that the imported equipments were meant for photographic laboratories rather than for use in printing industry. The appellant s claim to the contra has not been substantiated by them. 4. Today, there is no representation for the appellants despite notice, nor any request of theirs for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
