1998(04)LCX0100

IN THE CEGAT, COURT NO. II, NEW DELHI

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

CERAMIC DECORATORS LTD.

Versus

COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, NEW DELHI

Final Order No. 241/98-B2, dated 17-4-1998 in Appeal No. C/743/94-B2

Advocated By : Shri R. Pal Singh, Consultant, for the Appellant.

Shri R.S. Sangia, JDR, for the Respondent.

[Order per : S.S. Kang, Member (J)]. - Appellant filed this appeal against the Order-in-Appeal dated 22-8-1994 passed by the Collector, Customs (Appeals), New Delhi.

2. Appellant made import of “Screen Stretcher” and claimed classification of the goods u/s.h. No. 8442.30 of the Customs Tariff and also claimed the benefit of Notification No. 59/87-Cus., dated 1-3-1987. The Revenue assessed the goods u/h No. 84.79 of the Customs Tariff. Appellant paid duty and after clearance of goods, appellant filed refund claim. The refund claim was rejected. The Collector, Customs (Appeals) in the impugned order held that the `screen stretcher’ is an apparatus designed only for stretching the fabric for screen making and therefore, the said equipment would not be classifiable as machinery for preparing or making the printing blocks plates, under Customs Tariff Heading 8442 but is correctly classifiable under residuary Heading 8479.89 of the Customs Tariff.

3. Heard Shri R. Pal Singh, Constt. for the appellant and Shri R.S. Sangia, JDR for the respondent Revenue.

4. In this case, the dispute is regarding the classification of screen stretcher. The contention of the appellant is that it is an apparatus for preparing or making the printing screen/blocks classifiable u/s.h. No. 8442.30 of the Customs Tariff and is covered under the Notification No. 59/87-Cus., dated 1-3-1987 and the Revenue classified the goods u/h No. 8479 of the Customs Tariff as appliances having individual functions not specified or included elsewhere in this Chapter.

5. The contention of the appellant is that `screen stretcher’ is used for making printing blocks/screen for printing glass bottles for aerated water. As per the appellant, the process of making printing blocks/screens is as under :

“First, fine steel wiremesh is stretched by clamps fitted in the said apparatus to ensure even tension throughout the mesh. Stretching requires considerable skill and care. The apparatus is designed solely to fulfill this requirement. After achieving optimum even tension in the mesh, wooden block of appropriate size covered with adhesive are placed below it. The mesh sticks to the blocks. After the bond is firm, the mesh is cut and blocks with stretched mesh stick on their surface emerge. The mesh on the blocks is then coated with photo emulsion. Material to be printed is then placed on the mesh and exposed to light and mesh screen on the block is ready for printing glass bottles for aerated water.”

6. The contention of the appellant is that stretching of wire mesh is a sophisticated job and is an essential process for making the printing blocks/screen in the absence of optimum stretching, printing on bottles would not be of proper quality resulting in poor shade, poor coating and incomplete figure. The function of the stretcher is an integrated part of making the blocks/screens.

7. Heading 84.42 of the Customs Tariff provides as under :

“84.42 Machinery, apparatus and equipment (other than the machine-tools of Heading Nos. 84.56 to 84.65), for type-founding or type-setting, for preparing or making printing blocks, plates, cylinders or other printing components; printing type, blocks, plates, cylinders and other printing components; blocks, plates, cylinders and lithographic stones, prepared for printing purposes (for example, planed, grained or polished).”

8. Sub-heading No. 8442.30 provides “Other machinery, apparatus and equipment”.

9. The appellant also relied upon the description of `screen stretcher’ given in the book “The complete Service for the Decoration of Glass”, a guide of equipment and products for glass decoration 1993 Edition. The description of the `screen stretcher’ is given as “screen stretcher is designed to ensure not only even tension in each direction but also even tension at each clamp which gives uniform and accurate screens.” It describes as “adjustable screen fabric stretchers for glass and ceramic printing.”

10. Screen stretcher is used to achieve optimum even tension in the wire mesh and after achieving optimum even tension in the mesh, wooden block of appropriate size covered with adhesive block are placed below the wire mesh. When the mesh sticks to the blocks, the bond is firm, the mesh is cut and blocks with stretched mesh stick on their surface comes into existence, therefore, the screen stretcher is an apparatus for preparing or making printing blocks/plates/screen.

11. The Revenue classified the goods u/h No. 84.79 of the Customs Tariff as appliance having individual function not specified or included elsewhere in this Chapter.

12. In view of the above discussions, we find that the `screen stretcher’ is other apparatus for preparing or making printing blocks. classifiable u/h No. 84.42 of the Customs Tariff. Therefore, we are unable to agree with the findings of the Collector, Customs (Appeals) that `screen stretcher’ is an appliance having individual function not specified or included elsewhere in the Chapter 84.

13. As we held that the screen stretcher is classifiable u/s.h. No. 8442.30 of the Customs Tariff and the Notification No. 56/87-Cus., dated 1-3-1987 at serial No. 32 includes the goods falling under sub-heading No. 8442.30 of the Customs Tariff, therefore, the appellant is also entitled for the benefit of Notification No. 59/87-Cus., dated 1-3-1987.

14. In view of the above discussions, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed.

_______

Equivalent 1998 (103) ELT 257 (Tribunal)