SIRPUR PAPER MILLS LTD Vs. COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Revision Application dated 12 -2 -1980 against Order -in -Appeal No. C3/1897/79, dated 6 -10 -1979 passed by the Appellate Collector of Customs, Madras, has been transferred by the Government of India to the Tribunal for disposal under the provisions of Sec. 131B (2) of the Customs Act, 1962.

(2.) ON case (said to contain 3 Nos. Complete Control Valve) (no details) was assessed to duty under Heading 84.61 (1) at 60%+15% under B/E No. D -317 dated 7 -2 -1979 and a claim for refund of duty was filed on 9 -4 -1979 on the ground that the goods were assessable under Heading 84.61(2) at 40% + 5%. In support of the claim, a drawing was produced but it was stated that no 'catalogue was available. The Assistant Collector held that from the drawing nothing could be concluded to re -assess the goods under sub -item (2) and the write -up produced also does not specifically state how the goods could be re -classified. He, therefore, rejected the claim as inadmissible. At the appellate stage it was contended that the valves are isolating valves and should have been assessed under Heading 84.61(2) and a catalogue in German merely marking the position of the valve and a certificate from their own employee, were produced. Holding that these documents do not show that the goods are isolating valves and that the invoice description shows that they are only Control Valves, the Appellate Collector rejected the appeal.

(3.) IN the present appeal it is stated that three pieces Control Valves being spares for the Soot Blower system of the heat recovery Boiler of the Appellants' Caustic Recovery Plant, were imported from West Germany. Being spares of special size and quality and identifiable and not being capable of any other application, they should have been classified under Heading 84.01/02, wherein Soot Removers are specified. These parts cannot be used as pipe fittings which is confirmed by the German manufacturers in a letter dated 2 -7 -1979. If, however, Heading 84.01/02 is held to be inappropriate, the only alternative is Heading 84.61(2) as these valves are definitely isolating valves. The rejection by the Assistant Collector was due to non -application of mind and not due to insufficient details furnished since the Custom House should know what a Soot Remover Equipment is, how it functions and what part the Control Valve plays in it, specially when a detailed drawing is made available. The Appellate Collector denied natural justice to the appellants by expecting the German manufacturers to produce an English catalogue and not asking for a translation if the Engineers in the Custom House were unable to understand the illustrations in the catalogue. If the Chartered Engineer's Certificate was to be rejected, its veracity should have been verified independently by a reference, for instance, to the Chief Inspector of Boilers. A very elementary consideration of the basic principles on which the Soot Blower works will show that the Control Valve must necessarily be of the isolating type. The function of an Isolating Valve is to isolate one pneumatic equipment or machine from another pneumatic equipment or machine, when difference in the pressure develops in the unwanted direction or when the difference in pressure exceeds a designed level. The Valve in the Soot Blower does this exact function. The Appellate Collector has merely brushed aside the evidence without justification.