ELOFIC INDUSTRIES LTD. Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, BANGALORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal arises from Order -in -Appeal No. 43/99 -Cus., dtd. 3 -3 -99 by which the Commissioner has noted that the Auto Clipping Machine imported by the appellant does not produce any commodity by itself and therefore the benefit of Notfn. No. 11/97, dtd. 1 -3 -97 cannot be extended to them. The finding recorded by the Commissioner in Paras 4 to 7 is reproduced.

(2.) WE have heard ld. Counsel, Shri Shivadass for the appellants and ld. SDR, Shri P.M. Saleem for the Revenue.

(3.) LD . Counsel Shri Shivadass pointed out that the functions of the machine imported is to clip/seal both the side ends of the pleated paper according to the printed pamphlet. The steel clip coil is fed to the machine for sealing both the edges of the clipping filter paper, which automatically bends the steel clip and cut to size. They stated that the steel clipped paper has both the edges produced by the said machine as an essential part or component or intermediate product of the final product of filters. They admit in the appeal memo that as such it is not marketable and cannot be sold as goods or wares. He submitted that the item can be considered as commodity although it is not marketed and hence the benefit of notification should be extended. He pointed out that the Tribunal in the case of CC v. Dura Foam Industries (P) Ltd. [1986 (26) E.L.T. 341] has extended the benefit to a machine known as automatic circular stacking and splitting machine which cuts foam blocks and makes those blocks marketable. He likewise relied on the judgment rendered in the case of Camlin Pvt. Ltd. v. CC [1997 (90) E.L.T. 128] wherein the machine designed for production of a commodity was ferrules and rubber tips setting machine which was a machine by which rubber tips to pencils were fed to it. It was noted that unless the rubber is attached to the pencil, the pencil is not marketable and on that ground the benefit was extended.