C.C. CHENNAI Vs. STERILITE INDUSTRIES (INDIA)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this appeal the Revenue challenges the order in appeal No. M.CUS: 1543/96 dated 13.9.96 passed by the Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise (Appeals), Madras by which the Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the appeal filed by the assessee by holding that the goods i.e. X -ray Spectrometer imported by the assessee is classifiable under sub -heading 9027.30 of the CTA 1975/CET 1985.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that the assessee (hereinafter referred to as the importer) imported 'Rigaku/Fully Automated Sequential X -ray Spectrometer'. It was assessed under sub -heading 9022.19 of the CTA, 1975 with a basic rate of Customs duty at 50% + 2% with additional duty of Customs at 10% under heading 90.22 of CET, 1985. The lower authority confirmed this vide his order in original No. 277/96 dated 28.8.96 issued from F.No. (S59/147/6 Gr. 5B) directing the importer to pay the duty accordingly. The importer filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) claiming that the impugned goods be reassessed to duty under sub -heading 9027.30 attracting duty @ 25% + 2% +10% (CVD). The Commissioner (Appeals) applying rule 3(c) to the impugned equipment would be equally classifiable under both the headings viz 90.22 (as an X -ray equipment) and 90.27 (as Spectrometer). According to Rule 3(c) to the Interpretative Rule, the heading that appears last should be preferred.

(3.) THE Commissioner (Appeals) after considering the written and oral submissions made by the importer has held as under: