9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (8) TMI 106X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are liable to the rate of duty applicable to the bearings of which they are part. There is no justification for reading the entry conjunctively in the sense that the rate of duty applicable to the bearings of which they are part will apply only when the cups and cones of roller bearings are imported together but not if they are imported separately. Insofar as valuation is concerned, the Collector was right in rejecting the transaction value of the goods because, plainly, it was a totally unrealistic value. For the purpose of placing a value on the goods, however, the Collector resorted to very tenuous reasoning which we cannot uphold. At the same time, we must say that we do not approve of the findings of the Tribunal in this behalf, which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ectly classifiable under Sl. No. 6(a) above, whereas the respondents wanted the benefit of classification under Sl. No. 6(c). 4.The respondents filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court. The goods were allowed to be cleared by the High Court on the basis of a provisional assessment extending the benefit to the respondents of Sl. No. 6(c). The appellants preferred a Special Leave Petition to this Court; therein the appellants were directed to issue a show cause notice to the respondents and finalise the assessment of the goods by 6th September, 1991. 5.A notice in this behalf was issued. The respondents were heard and the Collector of Customs (Judicial) made an order on 30th August, 1991. He held that the goods were covered by Sl. No. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the essential character of a bearing." The meaning of the words `and' and `or' as set out in law lexicons and judgments was then adverted to. As far as the Exemption Notification was concerned, it was clear to the Tribunal that the imported cups did not fall within the term "Cups and cones" against Sl. No. 6(a), but they fell within the term "Others" against Sl. No. 6(c). It was not, the Tribunal observed, a question of the respondents (importers) "seeking to read the word `and' as `or', but of interpreting the word `and' as `and', that is, in conjunctive manner". Regarding valuation, the Tribunal found that the Collector had compared unbranded bearings with bearings bearing reputed brand names. He had compared the assessable value of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n other words, it was only if the classification "Others" was applied to cups imported separately, cones imported separately, inner rings imported separately and outer rings imported separately that the classification "Others" made sense. For this purpose learned counsel relied upon the extract of the Tribunal's order which we have quoted above. 9.All that the extracted order says is that cups and cones are the major component parts of roller bearings. The Tribunal does not hold that cups, cones and inner and outer rings comprise the entirety of roller bearings. 10In our view, the Tribunal mis-directed itself. There is no question of reading the word "and" disjunctively here. The Exemption Notification must be read plainly, as an ordinary ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
