COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS Vs. HINDUSTAN PULVERISING MILLS PVT.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) QUESTION involved in this appeal filed by the department is regarding classification of the goods described in the bill of entry as "Mill Grinding Machinery (Air Attrition Mill Model 0808 -3 Jet -o -Mizer). The department assessed it in the first instance under Tariff Heading (TH) 84.59(1) CTA, 1975 although the respondents herein claimed its assessment under TH 84.56. The Assistant Collector of Customs, Bombay, who passed the order in assessment dated 2 -3 -1984 held after going through the leaflet produced by the appellants that the imported machine was designed for use in the grinding of (i) minerals (ii) plastics (iii) pharmaceuticals and (iv) chemicals. The said Asstt. Collector, therefore, observed that the imported machine finds application or is designed for use in various industries, namely, mineral, plastic, pharmaceutical, chemicals etc. It was also held that classification of machine did not depend upon the use to which importer put it but it depended upon its functioning, capabilities and various uses. Therefore, he assessed the machine under TH 84.59(1). In coming to this conclusion he also relied on CCCN Explanatory Notes Vol. 3 -page 1366 under Heading 84.59(i) (2) which reads as follows : -

(2.) LEARNED SDR, Shri S.K. Roy has reiterated the grounds of appeal.

(3.) THE Appellant -Collector has observed that T.H. 84.56 is restricted, inter alia, to machine specifically designed for grinding of stones, ores or other mineral substances. The various types of machines included in T.H. 84.56 CTA are enumerated, according to him, on page 1355 of the Explanatory Notes to the CCCN Vol. 3. The machine under dispute is not similar to the one listed therein. The catalogue produced shows that the machine imported can be used for grinding of minerals as well as agricultural chemicals. Since it is not designed for production of a particular commodity, it is classifiable under Heading 84.59(I). Rule 2 of the Interpretative Rules of the Customs Import Tariff relied upon by the lower appellate authority, according to the Appellant -Collector, has no application in the instant case. It has thus been urged that the imported machine under consideration is basically meant for grinding of minerals as seen from catalogue. This particular Model 0808, according to the catalogue, submits the learned advocate, grinds Diatomogrous Earth, Shellac, Hyd Castor Oil, Anthracite Coal, Tremolite Hard Talc, Wollastonite Needles and Alumina Hydrate. The fact that it incidentally grinds agricultural chemicals like Lead Arsenate, Copper Oxychloride, 50% Tech Dieldrin and Sevin and should not alter the basic character of the machine and therefore, according to him, it falls under T.H. 84.56. Alternatively he urges that the TH 84.59(2) is suitable because it is a production machinery inasmuch as it mixes the shellac and soap stones. Catalogue also mentions the finished product. He relies in support of the alternative classification urged by him on (1) 1988 (36) ELT 367 (Tri.) [National Small Industries v. C.C. Bombay], (2) 1986 (26) ELT 341 (Tri.) [Collector of Customs v. Dura Foam Industries] and (3) 1980 ELT 735 [Hyderabad Asbestos].