1988(10)LCX0070

IN THE CEGAT, SPECIAL BENCH “B”, NEW DELHI

S/Shri S. Kalyanam, Member (J), K. Prakash Anand, Member (T) and P.C. Jain, Member (T)

BHARAT HEAVY ELECTRICALS LTD.

Versus

COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, BOMBAY

Order Nos. 455-462/88-B2, dated 27-10-1988 in Appeal Nos. 2416-17/85 and 1435-1440/84-B2

Cases Quoted

Keltron Power Devices Ltd. v. Collector — 1986(10)LCX0024 Eq 1987 (028) ELT 0093 (Tribunal) — Relied on [Paras 1, 3]

Semi Conductors v. Collector — 1987(09)LCX0073 Eq 1989 (042) ELT 0236 (Tribunal) — Relied on................ [Paras 1, 3]

Advocated By :   S/Shri N.C. Sogani, Consultant with R. Subramanian, Dy. G.M. and P.K. Srivastava, Manager, for the Appellant.

Shri K. Kumar, SDR, for the Respondent.

[Order per : S. Kalyanam, Member (J)]. - Since a common issue arises in all the above appeals, they are taken together and disposed of by a common order. At the outset, Shri N.G. Sogani, the learned Consultant for the Appellants did not dispute the fact that the goods in question namely, silicon diffused chips are classifiable under Heading 85.18/27(1) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The only question the learned Consultant canvasses for our consideration in the appeals is that the appellants would be entitled to concessional assessment in terms of Notification No. 172/77-Cus., dated 8-8-1977. In support of this plea, the learned Consultant places reliance on the ratio of the ruling of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Keltron Power Devices Ltd. v. Collector of Customs, Cochin [1986(10)LCX0024 Eq 1987 (028) ELT 0093 (T) = 1987 (010) ECR 0565 (CEGAT SB-B2)]. The learned Consultant further submitted that this decision has also been followed subsequently by this Tribunal in a batch of cases covered by Order No. 1921 to 1943/87-B2, dated 2-9-1987 [1987(09)LCX0073 Eq 1989 (042) ELT 0236 (Tribunal)].

2. Heard Shri Kumar, the learned SDR.

3. On consideration of the entire material before us, we are of the view that the ratio of the decisions relied upon by the learned Consultant for the appellants and referred to supra is applicable on all fours to the issue that arises for determination in the present appeals before us. Following the ratio of the aforesaid rulings, we hold that the appellants would be entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 172/77-Cus. cited supra in respect of the goods in question. In this view of the matter the appeals are allowed.

_______

Equivalent 2002 (149) ELT 79 (Tri. - Del.)