INDIAN ALUMINIUM CO LTD Vs. COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Customs Appellate Tribunal by its impugned order dated April 27, 1983 having classified the subject machine, the hot blocker, imported by the petitioner No. 1 from West Germany for their rolling mill at Belur, under heading No. 84.59(1) of Chapter 84 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 for payment of customs duty, instead of it being classified under heading No. 84.22 of the said Schedule, the petitioners have invoked the writ jurisdiction of this court for a direction upon the respondents to recall the said order to classify the machine under heading No. 84.22 and refund the sum of Rs. 31,66,108.24 paise together with interest being the excess amount of customs duty realised by the customs authorities from the petitioner No.1.

(2.) The petitioner No. 1, as it appears, in the year 1954 installed at its Belur factory a hot rolling mill. The function of the mill is to roll aluminium alloy ingots into slabs/sheets. To facilitate handling of longer rolled slabs/sheets of lower thickness in coiled form the machine in question, namely, the hot blocker, was installed by the petitioner No. 1 in its factory. Since the only purpose for such installation is to facilitate handling, for the purpose of payment of customs duty, it should have been classified according to the petitioners, under heading No. 84.22 of the First Schedule of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 instead of its being classified under the residuary heading No. 84.59(1) of the |aid Schedule.

(3.) The customs authorities, however, took a different view and classified the machine under the residuary heading No. 84.59(1) which requires payment of import duty at the rate of 60% instead of 40% which is the rate of duty in case of machines falling under heading No. 84.22.