Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2006 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2006 (4) TMI 269 - CESTAT, MUMBAIDemand duty - Manufacture - Excisability of ‘Custom Pack’ - Words and Phrases - Limitation - Difference of opinion between ld members - Third Member Order - HELD THAT:- ld. Member (J) has held that the product is a result of manufacture falling for classification under CET Sub-heading 9018.00 attracting duty at the appropriate rate and that the appellants are also liable to penalty - ld. Member (T) has held that the product in question is not manufactured goods and for that reason no excise duty is attracted. Third Member Order - In the present case, the items are associated things for heart surgery, all the items assembled in the ‘customs pack’ were already in existence and were only arranged together in a particular order for ready use as a set. The packing or assembling of the items in a particular order is not a process amounting to manufacture. Further, the classification adopted in the impugned order viz. CET Sub-heading 9018.00 is also not correct for the reason that the heading during the relevant period covered ‘instruments and appliances used in medical, surgical, dental or veterinary science including -------- while the customs pack is not instrument or appliance but merely a collection of accessories for heart surgery. I concur with the view of the ld. Member (Technical) - In view of the majority order, the demand of duty is set aside and appeal allowed with consequential relief to the appellants.
|