1. The question for decision in this appeal originally filed as a revision application to the Government of India, is whether D.B.E.Computer Voltage Stabiliser imported by the appellants by B.E. Cash No.133, dt. 31-7-1973, ex. s.s. Rebenfeles are chargeable to countervailing duty.
2. The appellants had imported a number of items by the Bill of Entry under reference. The applied for refund on various items and on some items they succeeded. In the present appeal, the question relates only to DBE Computer and Stabiliser. The Assistant Collector by his order dated 15-7-1976 rejected the part of the claim holding that voltage stabiliser and D.B.E. Computer are to be treated as one unit. The Appellate Collector of Customs, Bombay by his order dated 21-9-1979 rejected the claim inter alia holding that item 33D of C.E.T. covers Auxiliary machines and voltage stabiliser would be included therein.
Hence the present appeal.
3. At the hearing of appeal, Sh. C.L. Beri, Advocate represented the appellants and Sh. Chandermouli, S.D.R. represented the respondent.
4. Sh. Beri, learned counsel submitted that the goods imported by the appellants was A 1 meter Computer System consisting of DBC and Voltage Stabiliser. He submitted that voltage stabiliser is not an officer machine falling under item 33D of the C.E.T. At the material time, it was not classifiable under any tariff item of the C.E.T. The Notification No. 51/70-CE, dt. 1-3-1970, as amended could not be applicable to the Voltage stabiliser.
5. On behalf of the Department, Sh. Chandermouli, S.D.R. defended the orders passed by the lower authorities. To a question by the Bench, whether if the stabiliser had been imported alone it would be chargeable to countervailing duty, he replied it would not have been so chargeable at the material time.
6. Notification No. 51/70-CE, dt. 1-3-1970, covers Office Machines and apparatus falling under T.I. 33D but those which are not specified in the Schedule appended to the Notification are exempt from the whole of the duty of excise. Item No. 30 of the C.E.T. covers computers, so far as the Computers are concerned, there can be no doubt they were not exempt from duty of excise. It would follow that it would be liable to countervailing duty.
As to Voltage stabiliser, it is an item of goods in its own right. It would not be appropriate to classify the same alongwith the computers with which it is to be worked. It cannot be said that the Notification was applicable to the Voltage stabiliser. It is not shown that at the material time Voltage stabiliser fell under any tariff item of the C.E.T. therefore, it should be held not chargeable to countervailing duty.
As a result, the appeal is partly allowed. Voltage stabiliser at the relevant time is held not chargeable to countervailing duty and computer is held correctly chargeable to countervailing duty. The appeal is thus partly allowed in the light of observations aforesaid.