TMI Blog2008 (4) TMI 303X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... isions Tribunal has held that fuel and oil, apart from the quantity which is contained in engine and machinery, are required to be assessed separately under their respective headings and not under heading 89.08 – appeals filed by the revenue are allowed - C/21-27/2008 - A/919-925/2008-WZB/AHD, - Dated:- 29-4-2008 - Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Member (J) and Shri B.S.V. Murthy, Member (T) Smt. A. V ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mmissioner was reversed by the Commissioner (Appeals), by following the Tribunal decision in the case of Ghaziabad Ship Breakers - 2003 (151) E.L.T. 636 (Tri-Del.). The said orders of the Commissioner (Appeals) are appealed against before us. 2. After hearing both sides, we find that the Commissioner (Appeals) has followed the earlier decision of the Ghaziabad Ship Breakers and by observin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al was correct in ignoring the decisions of coordinate benches, inter alia, in Ghaziabad Ship Breakers v. Commissioner of Customs [2003 (151) E.L.T. 636 (Tri.)] and the Circular of the CBEC bearing No. 37/96-Cus. dated 3-7-1996, in holding the oil in a vessel's engine room as not forming part of the vessel for the purpose of classification, without setting out any reasons for taking a differen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... location of the fuel and oil. In this case there is no dispute that fuel and lubricating oil was confined in a tank kept in the engine room. Therefore, it cannot be considered as being contained in the vessel's machinery and engine. Hence, the lower authorities have correctly classified the goods in question on merits in their respective headings." The Tribunal as well as Commissioner (Appeals), ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eparately under their respective headings, Reference in this regard is made to Tribunal decision in the Shiv Marine Industries P. Ltd. v. C.C.E., Bhavnagar - 2004 (178) E.L.T. 1048 (Tri.-Mumbai) and Bhikkamal Chotelal v. C. Cus. C.Ex., Ahmedabad - 2007 (211) E.L.T. 303 (Tri.-Ahmd.) and in the case of C.C.E., Rajkot v. Saibaba Ship Breaking Corporation - 2002 (140) E.L.T. 135 (Tri.). ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|