1997(08)LCX0042

IN THE CEGAT, COURT NO. II, NEW DELHI

S/Shri Lajja Ram, Member (T) and S.S. Kang, Member (J)

INSTRUMENTATION ENGINEERS PVT. LTD.

Versus

COLLR. OF CUSTOMS, MADRAS

Final Order No. C/1874/97-B2, dated 11-8-1997 in Appeal No. C/1230/97-B2

Advocated By : None, for the Appellants.

Shri A.K. Agarwal, SDR, for the Respondent.

[Order per : Lajja Ram, Member (T)]. - In this appeal filed by M/s. Instrumentation Engineers Pvt. Ltd., the matter relates to the classification of the goods imported - Centre Shaft, Changer Gear and Gear Plate under the new Customs Tariff in force from 28-2-1986. The appellants have classified the said products under sub-heading No. 9026.90 of the Tariff as parts and accessories of the goods falling under Heading No. 90.26 which covered instruments and apparatus for measuring or checking the flow, level, pressure or other variables of liquids or gases (for example, flow meters etc.). It was the contention of the importers that the Centre Shaft, Changer Gear and Gear Plate were parts and accessories of flow meters. The Collector of Customs (Appeals), Madras, after referring to the Note 2(a) of Chapter 90 observed that the goods imported were transmission elements and were correctly classifiable under sub-heading No. 8483.40 of the Tariff which among others covered transmission elements.

2. In their communication dated 28-2-1997, the appellants had submitted that the matter may be decided on merits of the case as they were unable to attend the hearing on 5-3-1997. Subsequently, they have submitted copies of the bill of entry, invoice, certificate of origin and literature of product.

3. We have heard Shri A.K. Agarwal, SDR, and have gone through the documents on record.

4. We find that the goods had been described in the bill of entry as Centre Shaft, Changer Gear and Gear Plate. The Asstt. Collector of Customs had observed in his order that the goods involved were transmission element and even though they also formed part of flow meter, they were assessable to duty under Customs Tariff Heading No. 8483.40. On appeal, the Collector of Customs (Appeals) had recorded that the appellants had not contested that the goods involved were transmission elements. They had pleaded that as they were part of the flow meter, they should be classified under the Heading which covered the parts and accessories of flow meter. He referred to Note 2(a) of Chapter 90 of the Tariff which provided that the parts and accessories which were goods included in any of the headings of this Chapter or of Chapter 84, 85 or 91 (other than Heading No. 84.85, 85.48 or 90.33) were to be classified in their respective heading. He held that transmission elements were to be classified under Heading No. 84.83 of the Tariff as they were specifically covered by that heading even if they formed part of any instrument.

5. The goods Centre Shaft, Changer Gear and Gear Plate had been imported independently. Under the scheme of the Customs Tariff if the goods are specifically described in any specific Tariff Entry, then they are to be classifiable therein even if they are part and accessory of a machine which is classified separately. Both the adjudicating authority and the appellate authority had held the goods in question as transmission elements and this had not been challenged by the appellants. As transmission elements were specifically covered under sub-heading No. 8483.40, we do not find any infirmity in the view taken by the Collector of Customs (Appeals).

6. The appellants have also submitted that the Asstt. Collector of Customs has passed the order without giving them adequate opportunity of personal hearing. We find that the Collector of Customs (Appeals) had afforded an opportunity to the appellants for personal hearing and the personal hearing was accorded and during the personal hearing, appeal points were reiterated.

7. As the submissions made by the appellants had been taken into account and as on merits, we find that the view taken by the Collector of Customs (Appeals) was correct, we do not find any merit in this appeal and the same is rejected.

Equivalent 1997 (96) ELT 92 (Tribunal)

Equivalent 1997 (023) RLT 0359