1997(11)LCX0058

 IN THE CEGAT, COURT NO. II, NEW DELHI

Ms. Jyoti Balasundaram, Member (J) and Shri Shiben K. Dhar, Member (T)

KIRLOSKAR PNEUMATIC CO. LTD.

Versus

COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, BOMBAY

Final Order No. C/2396/97-B2, dated 13-11-1997 in Appeal No. C/1806/89-B2

CASE CITED

Southern Petrochemical Ind. Corporation Ltd. v. Collector — 1996(10)LCX0137 Eq 1997 (089) ELT 0530 (Tribunal) —Followed                                                              [Paras 2, 3]

Advocated By : Shri T. Vishwanathan, Advocate, for the Appellant.

Shri S.N. Ojha, JDR, for the Respondent.

[Order per : Jyoti Balasundaram, (Member (J)]. - The appellants herein imported valves and shafts and claimed classification under Customs Tariff Heading 98.06 by treating them as parts of locomotives and also claimed the benefit of assessment under Notification 69/87-Cus. The authorities below rejected the claim on the ground that the items, being of general use, were not assessable under Heading 98.06 and since Notification 132/87 has been issued in terms of Note 7(d) of Chapter 98 of the CTA, 1975, which excludes valves, shafts and fittings falling under headings 8481.10, 8433.10 and 8535.90 (sic) from the coverage of Chapter 98.06, notification benefit is not available for the goods in question. The assessment made by the Asstt. Collector was upheld by the Collector (Appeals).

2. We have heard Shri T. Vishwanathan, ld. Counsel, who at the outset fairly concedes that the issue in dispute has been decided against the importers herein in the case of Southern Petrochemicals Ind. Corporation Ltd. v. CC., Madras, reported in 1996(10)LCX0137 Eq 1997 (089) ELT 0530 (Tribunal) = 1997 (018) RLT 724, in which it has been held that worm wheels were classifiable under Heading 84.83 and not under Heading 98.06 in view of the Chapter Note 7(d) of Chapter 98 and Notification 132/87.

3. Ld. DR in addition to reiterating the findings of the authorities below, relies upon the above order of the Tribunal.

4. Following the ratio of the order cited above, which applies squarely to the present case, we hold that the goods did not merit classification under Heading 98.06 but under sub-heading 8481.80 (Valves), 8635.90 (Switches) and 8483.10 (Shafts), and the benefit of Notification 69/87, dated 1-3-1987 is also not available to the appellants, in view of the specific provision in Notification 132/87, dated 19-3-1987.

5. We, therefore, uphold the impugned order and reject the appeal.

_______

Equivalent 1998 (99) ELT 112 (Tribunal)

Equivalent 1998 (024) RLT 0362