GOETZE (INDIA) LTD. Vs. C.C.E.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants are manufacturers of I.C. Engine parts like piston and gudgeon pins. The appellants also procure and supply piston rings and circlips. These bought out items are at times supplied along with manufactured items, and at other times, separately. Under the order impugned herein it has been held that the bought out piston rings and circlips are parts of piston assembly and therefore, their value should also form part of the assessable value of the piston assemblies cleared by the appellants. A duty demand of over Rs. 1.7 crores and an equal of penalty have been made on the appellants.

(2.) The contention of the appellant is that the pistons and gudgeon pins and piston rings and circlips are all different parts of I.C. engine but none of these items is to be treated as part of another item. That is to say, piston rings and circlips cannot be treated as parts of pistons and subjected to valuation of duty on that basis. The appellant have submitted that the very fact of separate billing and separate sale of the items would show that the piston rings and circlips are not parts of pistons. They also pointed out that during the relevant period, about 44% of pistons were cleared without circlips and 88% pistons were cleared without piston rings. The appellant have also pointed out that there is no classification in excise as piston assembly inasmuch as, Tariff Item 84.09 deals with "parts suitable for use solely or principally with the engines of heading No. 8407 or 8408". during the hearing of the case, learned Counsel for the appellants pointed out that this issue is no more in doubt inasmuch as the Tribunal has held in favour of the assessee in the case of X.

(3.) As against the above contentions raised on behalf of the appellants, learned SDR has pointed out that an expert opinion relied on in the present adjudication order has clearly stated that "rings and circlips are essential parts of piston assembly." Learned SDR therefore, has contended that based on available facts, the present case is to be decided in favour of the Revenue.