(1.) THE appellant filed this appeal against the order -in -appeal passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Calcutta.
(2.) IN this case, the issue is of classification of rollers imported by the appellants. The appellants claimed the classification under Tariff Heading 7326.19 of the Customs Tariff as other articles of iron or steel forged or stamped, but not further worked. Whereas the Revenue classified the goods under Tariff Heading 8482.99 as other parts of ball or roller bearings.
(3.) HE , further, submits that the imported goods had to undergo various processes i.e. surface carburising, washing surface hardening, heat treatment to achieve hardness, rough grinding, finished grinding and honing to reduce size. He submits that the process of carbureting is the addition of carbon to the surface of low carbon steel at high temperature for surface hardening. He, further, submits that unless and until the imported rollers go through the aforesaid processes, they cannot be identified as part of roller bearing nor can it be said that they have essential characteristics as part of roller bearing. Ld. Counsel submits that the supplier vide letter dated 6 -4 -1995, clarified that the goods, in question, were in semi -finished condition. He relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Motor Industries Co. Ltd. v. Assistant Collector of Customs reported in : 1992 (62) E.L.T. 13 and submits that the goods requiring major processes like turning, grinding, broaching, groove cutting, heat treatment and surface treatment, such goods cannot be construed as having the essential character of complete and finished article and cannot fall within the scope of Rule 2(a) of Rules for Interpretation of Customs Tariff Act, 1975. He, therefore, prays that the appeal be allowed.