Skip to content


Kirloskar Brothers Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtCustoms Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided On
Reported in(1983)LC1440DTri(Delhi)
AppellantKirloskar Brothers Ltd.
RespondentCollector of Customs
Excerpt:
.....is whether hastelloy 'b' imported by the appellants which contained 15.078 per cent. nickel, 6 per cent, iron and rest other non-ferrous metals etc.should be assessed to customs duty under item 70(1) of the erstwhile indian customs tariff as done by the department or at lower rate of duty under item 65(b) ict as urged by the appellants. the lower authorities have rejected the appellants claim on the short point that item 65(b) related to non-ferrous nickel alloys and since the subject goods contained iron, they cannot be categorised as a non-ferrous alley. the department's representative stated that the govt. of india's order-in-revision relied on by the appellants applied the section notes and chapter notes of the subsequent customs tariff act, 1975 to the erstwhile indian customs.....
Judgment:
1. The case came up for hearing on 4,5.1983, The appellants' letter dated 30th March, 1983 was placed before us in which the appellants have stated that they did not desire to attend the hearing in person and that the Bench may decide the matter on the basis of the evidence already furnished by them, including a copy of the Govt. of India's Order-in-Revision No. 2965 of 1978 dated 19.1.79 passed in their favour in an identical matter.

2. The question under consideration in the case before us is whether Hastelloy 'B' imported by the appellants which contained 15.078 per cent. nickel, 6 per cent, iron and rest other non-ferrous metals etc.

should be assessed to customs duty under item 70(1) of the erstwhile Indian Customs Tariff as done by the Department or at lower rate of duty under item 65(b) ICT as urged by the appellants. The lower authorities have rejected the appellants claim on the short point that item 65(b) related to non-ferrous nickel alloys and since the subject goods contained iron, they cannot be categorised as a non-ferrous alley. The Department's representative stated that the Govt. of India's Order-in-Revision relied on by the appellants applied the Section Notes and Chapter Notes of the subsequent Customs Tariff Act, 1975 to the erstwhile Indian Customs Tariff which was not correct. He stated that both the Assistant Collector as well as the Appellate Collector had not given any authority or basis for their finding that an alloy containing 6 per cent, iron and 94 per cent, non-ferrous metals ceased to be a non-ferrous alloy. He requested that the case may be remanded to the Appellate Collector for a fresh consideration. On careful consideration of the matter, we agree with him. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned Order-in-Appeal, remand the matter to the Appellate Collector and direct him to decide it afresh after making trade enquiries and consulting authoritative books on Metallurgy as to whether the subject goods were really known as other than non-ferrous alloys.


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