UNION OF INDIA, CBEC Vs. SEALOL HINDUSTAN LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The impugned order dated 20th June, 1990 of the learned Single Judge is on the basis of an carlier judgment dated 22/23 March 1988 (17) ECR 186 (Bombay), of this Court in the petitioners' own case. The said earlier judgment was accepted by the appellants. Following the said judgment, Madras High Court had also, by its judgment dated 8th December, 1988, allowed Writ Petition No. 3721 of 1982.

(2.) Ordinarily, therefore, it would have been in order for this Court to straightaway dismiss the appeal. Referring to General Rules for the Interpretation of the First ScheduleImport Tariff (Section 2), in particular the General Explanatory Note thereto, Shri Dalai, the learned Counsel for the appellants, however, stated that parts of all kinds of pumps fall under Entry No. 8413.91 and that this aspect requires consideration. But this aspect, assuming it requires consideration, was admittedly not urged before the learned Single Judge who allowed the petition at the stage of admission itself. Even otherwise, we find that nothing much turns on this aspect even if it is assumed that Shri Dalal's submission is correct.

(3.) The petitioners manufacture Mechanical Seals in technical collaboration with M/s. E. G. & G. Scalol, U.S.A. The Mechanical Seals are specially designed for fitment into Centrifugal Pumps only. For the manufacture of the said Mechanical Seals the petitioners have been importing various parts/components. The case of the appellants is that Parts of all kinds of pump fall under Entry No. 8413.91 and not under 8413.70. Alternative claim is that Mechanical Seals are or can be used by the petitioners not only as part of and in the manufacture of Centrifugal Pumps but also in the manufacture of many other articles and, therefore, Mechanical Seals cannot be considered parts of Centrifugal Pumps assuming as part of Centrifugal Pumps they are liable to the same duly as is leviable on Centrifugal Pumps.