1999(03)LCX0034

IN THE CEGAT, SOUTH ZONAL BENCH, MADRAS

S/Shri S.L. Peeran, Member (J) and V.K. Ashtana, Member (T)

R.K. TRADERS

Versus

COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, CHENNAI

Final Order No. 602/99, dated 26-3-1999 in Appeal No. C/94/99/MD

Advocated By : Shri A.K. Jayaraj, Advocate, for the Appellant.

Shri R. Victor Thyagaraj, SDR, for the Respondent.

[Order per : V.K. Ashtana, Member (T)]. - This appeal is against Order- in-Appeal No. 52/99, dated 18-2-1999 passed by the Collector (Appeals) wherein product glue gun in blister packing has been classified under 84.24 upholding the Order-in-Original No. 324/98, dated 6-1-1999.

2. Heard Shri A.K. Jayaraj, learned Counsel for the appellants who submits that the correct classification of this project would be under 84.65 as a machine for glueing hard materials like wood, leather, glass, plastics etc. He shows the sample of the said product along with the blister packing on which the end-use thereof has been mentioned as Trigger feed Glue Gun for bonding materials in just 60 seconds like paper, glass, cloth, wood, plastic, leather, ceramic, metals etc. The illustration given therein includes card board packages and fixing of chairs, shoes, metallic tubes etc. He submits that this is clearly machine applying glue and not a general purpose spray gun as covered under 84.24 sought to be applied to it by the department.

3. Heard Shri R. Victor Thyagaraj, learned SDR who submitted that this product does not come within the ambit of machine tool inasmuch as this machine is not capable of being used for working on any hard surface to give shape thereto or remove certain material therefrom. He referred to page 1284 of the HSN which reads as follows :

“This heading covers machine-tools for the shaping or surface-working (including cutting, forming and assembling) of wood (and materials derived from wood), cork, bone, hardened rubber, hard plastics and similar hard materials (horn, corozo, mother of pearl, ivory etc.)”

Therefore, he submits that 84.65 is ruled out and 84.24 is the appropriate heading under which the item should be classified. He submits that glue is dispersed by this machine and therefore, HSN notes on page 1188 reproduced below would be attracted in this case :

“This heading covers machines and appliances for projecting, dispersing or spraying steam, liquids or solid materials (e.g. sand, powders, granules, grit or matallic abrasives) in the form of a jet, a dispersion (whether or not in drips) or a spray.”

Therefore, he submits that there is no infirmity in the order-in-appeal.

4. I have considered the rival submissions and records of the case including the sample shown in the court. I find that the product in question should be rightly classified under 8465.99 of the Customs Tariff Act for the following reasons :

(a) 84.65 no doubt specifies machine for working wood etc. However, it also includes machines for nailing, stapling, glueing etc. of these hard materials. The only purpose for which the imported machine can be put to use is glueing of such materials like wood, plastics, glass etc. as is clearly evident from the instructions on the blister packing which is also recorded above.

(b) The principle involved in the operation of this product is seen to be that glue in solid form is inserted into the chamber of this gun and thereafter the gun is connected to electric power which actuates the heating element so that the glue in solid form is melted into liquid form. When the trigger is acuated the liquid glue trickles out of the nozzle for applying on surface to be bonded. However, two things are significantly missing from this gun. Firstly, there is no container which can house the liquid to be sprayed. Secondly, there is no provision for either connecting the gun to a source of spraying by compressed air or steam which would force out the said liquid for spraying from this gun. There is no inbuilt system in this gun which would force out the liquified glue either in dispersion or spray.

(c) In this connection I also find that the explanatory notes to Section XVI with respect to heading 84.24 (B) dealing with spray gun and similar appliances clearly records that spray gun and similar appliances have to be attached to compressed air or steam lines and also connected either directly or through a conduit with a reservoir to the material to be sprayed. Further, they are fitted with triggers or other valves for controlling the flow through nozzle for a jet or a divergent spray. They can also have a self contained electric compressor or pump for spraying material. Applying this note to the present product, and as noted above, I find that the absence of any reservoir and absence of any device by which it can be connected either to compressed air or steam as well absence of any pump in the said gun it clearly rules it out from the ambit of being a spray gun.

(d) As against this, it is not disputed that the gun liquifides the solid glue and the said liquid glue is ejected out of the gun for the purpose of bonding to the hard materials as alreadey discussed above. Therefore, in view of this clear design as well as the end use of this product, its use is limited only to be used as gun for applying glue on hard surface and I find that the description under Heading 8465 is more specific to this product and therefore, the product would clearly fall therein.

5.  In view of the aforesaid analysis and the finding, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed with consequential relief if any as per law.

_______

Equivalent 1999 (110) ELT 811 (Tribunal)

Equivalent 1999 (032) RLT 0860