NATIONAL ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES Vs. COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE question for decision in this appeal, originally filed as revision application Government of India against No. S/49 -640/79 Air dt. 27 -11 -1979, passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals), Bombay is whether Rolled Steel Rings weighing 2.360 metric tonne imported by the appellants should be classified under heading 84.62 (1) as Ball Bearings as claimed by the appellants or under heading 73.33/40 as done by the lower authorities.

(2.) A consignment of Rolled Steel Rings weighing 2.360 m. t. was imported by the Appellants by Bill of Entry No. Cash -801 dated 14 -6 -78. The Customs authorities assessed the goods under heading 73.33/40 and realised the appropriate duty. The appellants applied for refund claiming re -assessment under heading 84.62 (1) as Ball bearings in terms of Rule -2A of Rule of Interpretation of Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The Assistant Collector of Customs by his order dated 24 -3 -79 held that the goods are steel casting in form of rough finished rings without any taper surface or groove and not identifiable part of specific machine or instruments. Accordingly, he rejected the claim. The order was upheld in appeal by the Collector of Customs (Appeal), Bombay by order dated 27 -11 -1979. Hence the present appeal.

(3.) IN the ground of appeal, the appellants have urged that the goods are rolled steel rings imported for the manufacture of ball bearing races having its internal diameter of 711 mm. They challenge the Appellate Collector's findings that goods are made of steel castings. It is urged that rings are for thrust ball bearing, which do not require any tapering or inner grooving. The rings have been imported to the nearest size required for the manufacture of bearing races of ball bearing leaving limited margin for machining to be done locally. They have also relied on Rule -2A of the Interpretation Rules and submitted that the goods incomplete or unfinished, which have acquired the essential character of finished product, should be classified as such. On these grounds, they claimed assessment under heading 84.62 (1) of Customs Tariff Act, 1975 at 40%+5%.