1986(12)LCX0074

BEFORE THE CEGAT, SPECIAL BENCH ‘B2’, NEW DELHI

S/Shri Harish Chander, Member (J) and I.J. Rao, Member (T)

M.C.B. (INDIA) PVT. LTD.

Versus

COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

Order No. 02/86-B2, dated 24-12-1986 in Appeal No. CD(SB)(T) A. No. 689/81-B2

Advocated By: Shri V. Lakshmikumaran, Advocate, for the Appellants.

Shri J. Gopinath, S.D.R., for the Respondent.

[Order per : I.J. Rao, Member (T)]. - The appellants imported Tungsten Metal Tips which ware assessed to Customs duty under Heading No. 85.08. Subsequently, the appellants made an Application for refund of part of the Customs duty on re-classification of the goods under Heading No. 81.01(1). The Assistant Collector of Customs rejected the application on the ground that the imported goods were used as ignition equipments in internal combustion engines and in view of the interchangability, the goods were classifiable under Heading 85,08.

2. Aggrieved, the appellants filed an appeal before the Appellate Collector. The Appellate Collector rejected the appeal on the ground that the Tungsten Metal Tips imported constituted manufactured articles other than in the shape of Tungsten plates and according to provisions of B.T.N. referred to by the appellants themselves, this item cannot be considered as Tungsten plates. The appellants, thereafter, filed a revision application before the Government of India. This application, on transfer to the Tribunal, is now an appeal before us.

3. We heard Shri V. Lakshmikumaran, Advocate, for the appellants. The learned Advocate explained that the imported goods are not exclusively used in ignition coil only as stated by the appellants in their revision application. He further explained that the tungsten metal tips are used is various other electrical apparatus. Shri Lakshmikumaran, also submitted that the imported tips cannot be used by themselves but had to be used in association with other parts. They were not identifiable parts of any machine and had no part numbers and were only raw materials to be manufactured into parts for use in various electrical apparatus.

4. Shri Gopinath agreed, as a matter of fact, that the tungsten metal tips are to be used in various electrical instruments, but asserted that these are also used in ignition equipments of internal combustion engines. When we questioned him on the reliance on B.T.N. to which the learned Appellate Collector referred, Shri Gopinath could only point out the relevant portion of the B.T.N. and had no further comments to offer.

5. We have considered the submissions made by both the sides. Insofar as the B.T.N. (Heading No. 81.01) is concerned, the part dealing with tungsten and its alloys is as follows:

“Manufactures not more specifically covered by other headings of the nomenclature (see Note 1 to Section XV). Most tungsten articles except springs, are in fact classified in Sections XVI and XVII; for example, a complete electric contact falls in Chapter 85, whereas a tungsten plate used to make such a contact would fall within the present heading.”

6. This shows that the Appellate Collector did not read the entire explanation. Any way, the Customs Tariff Act is an independent Act and the First Schedule thereto has to be interpreted in its own rights. In the present case, it is clear that the imported tungsten tips are in the nature of raw material. There is nothing to show that they are identifiable parts of any machinery or even less to show that they are used only in ignition equipments of internal combustion engines.

7. Heading No. 85.08 deals with electrical starting and ignition equipments for internal combustion engines, etc. whereas Heading Nos. 81.01/04 specifically deals with tungsten, molybdenum, tantalum and other base metals and cermets, wrought or un-wrought and articles thereof mentioned under the sub-item of this heading and clearly covers the imported goods. In this view, we accept that the imported goods are correctly classifiable under Heading 85.01/04 (1) of Customs Tariff Act.

Accordingly, we allow the appeal and order consequential relief, if any.

______

Equivalent 1989 (42) ELT 449 (Tribunal)