Skip to content


Heavy Engineering Corpn. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtCustoms Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1985)LC1132Tri(Delhi)
AppellantHeavy Engineering Corpn. Ltd.
RespondentCollector of Customs
Excerpt:
.....foods and we are, therefore, dealing with both the cases in a single order. the goods imported we auto dump car which were, assessed by the department of customs under item 75(4) ict. it is urged before us that the goods are, in fact, assessable under item 72 (c) read with item 72 (3) ict and not under item 75 (4) ict.2 shri itc. mandal, dy. manager (design) has argued before us that the auto dump car imported by the appellants is a steel plant equipment. it is used exclusively in a steel plant and, therefore, cannot be classified as a common carriage. according to him, item 75(4) ict covers carriages having a general use. in any case the import is not in the form of a carriage but components. after assembly these would be turned out in the shape of carriages. it is stated that auto.....
Judgment:
1. In these two cases, which were Revision Applications filed before the Govt. of India, now appeals before the Tribunal, the subject concerns classification of the same foods and we are, therefore, dealing with both the cases in a single order. The goods imported we Auto Dump Car which were, assessed by the department of Customs under item 75(4) ICT. It is urged before us that the goods are, in fact, assessable under item 72 (c) read with item 72 (3) ICT and not under item 75 (4) ICT.2 Shri ITC. Mandal, Dy. Manager (Design) has argued before us that the Auto Dump Car imported by the appellants is a Steel Plant Equipment. It is used exclusively in a Steel Plant and, therefore, cannot be classified as a common carriage. According to him, item 75(4) ICT covers carriages having a general use. In any case the import is not in the form of a carriage but components. After assembly these would be turned out in the shape of carriages. It is stated that Auto Dump Car is a heavy duty bogie, driven by Loco and is meant for transportation of cokes, lime stones and ores for feeding the Blast Furnace Shri Mandal has referred to various technical specification which the Auto Dump Car must satisfy for its use in a steel plant. It is further urged that the Auto Dump Car has many similarities with a railway wagon. It could, therefore, possibly be considered for classification under item 74(2) ICT but not under item 75(4). However, it is essentially an industrial apparatus meant for a Steel Plant and, therefore, it is urged that it should be classifiable under item 72(c) read with item 72(3) ICT.3. On behalf of the respondents, Shri S.C. Rohatgi, JDR, has reiterated the views of the Appellate Collector. It is contended that industrial system has been defined in note below item 72 ICT. An item requires to be employed directly in performance of any process or series of processes of manufacture for it to be considered as a part of an industrial system. Further, the Auto Dump Cars are driven by Locos.

They cannot, therefore, be held to be mechanically propelled. It is further pointed out that the function of the Auto Dump Cars is to transport ores or scraps to the Steel Plant and dump them at the yard mechanically. They also carry slag, coal etc. from one dumping place to another dumping place inside the plant area. It is urged that, in fact, the function of the Dump Cars is related to operations prior to, and some time, after actual production, and these goods are not a part of the industrial system as such.

4. We have carefully considered the submissions before us and the evidence on record. The goods have been assessed by the department under item 75(4) ICT. This entry reads as follows: 75 (4)--Carriages and carts which are not mechanically propelled, not otherwise specified, and parts and accessories thereof, excluding rubber types and tubes.

As per the Appellants, the classification should be under item 72(c) read with item 72 (3). These are also extracted below: 72 (c) apparatus and appliances, not to be operated by manual or animal labour, which are designed for use in an industrial system as parts indispensable for its operation and have been given for that purpose some special shape or quality which would not be essential for their use for any other purpose ; 72 (3)--component parts of machinery as defined in item Nos. 72, 72 (1) and 72 (2) and not otherwise specified, namely, such parts only as are essential for the working of the machine or apparatus and have been given for that purpose some special shape or quality which would not be essential; for their use for any other purpose but excluding small tools like twist drills and reamers, dies and tape, gear cutters and hacksaw blades.

We observe that Auto Dump Car undoubtedly is an item of use in a steel plant. It has been shown by the Appellants that these auto dump cars, which arc meant for use in steel plants, have to satisfy various technical specification in order to be suited to the requirements of a steel plant. However, it is one thing to say that Auto Dump Car is meant for use in a steel plant and it is quite another matter to claim that it is a part of the industrial system of the steel plant. The Appellate Collector has argued with some conviction that Auto Dump Cars, in fact, have no function to perform really in the actual production in steel plants. The function of this item is related essentially to transportation of raw material etc. prior to the process of production and may be, sometimes, to certain transportation of materials subsequent to the production process. As was rightly pointed but before us, the term 'industrial system' has been defined in the note under Tariff Item No. 72 itself, which reads as follows: Note: The term industrial system used in sub-item (c) means an installation designed to be employed directly in the performance of any process or series of processes necessary for the manufacture, production or extraction of any commodity.

We agree that in terms of the explanation given in the above note, the goods in question cannot be classifiable under item 72 (c) as apparatus or appliance which are designed for use in an industrial system as parts indispensable for its operation.

5. In view of the foregoing finding, we are not depending on the argument from the department's side against the classification proposed by the Appellants on the grounds that the Auto Dump Cars are not mechanically self-propelled. This is not an essential qualification for classification under item 72 (c), which is restricted to apparatus and appliances not to be operated by manual or animal labour. Auto Dump Cars are certainly not operated by manual or animal labour. However, as already stated, they can nevertheless not be regarded as a part of the industrial system of the Steel Plant in terms of note below Tariff Item 72 ICT. In fact, the appellants themselves while claiming that the item cannot be classified as a common carriage, have admitted that it is nothing but a heavy duty bogie for the carriage of raw materials etc.

We are, therefore, holding that the goods in question are correctly classifiable under item 75 (4) ICT which covers carriages and carts which are not mechanically propelled, not otherwise specified etc.

6. In view of the foregoing findings, the orders of the Appellate Collector in the two cases before us are upheld and the Appeals are dismissed.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //