TMI Blog2001 (7) TMI 398X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assification List declaring their product viz. bottle cooler as industrial refrigerator and claiming exemption in respect of the product under the Notification. The Classification List was approved by the proper officer of Central Excise in November 1983. But soon thereafter, the Assistant Collector issued a letter dated 24-1-1984 to the party directing them to treat the approval of the Classification List as provisional under Rule 9B and also to show cause why the product should not be treated as refrigerating appliance and why the benefit of concessional rate of duty under the Notification should not be denied. The respondents contested the Department s proposal to deny the benefit of the Notification. The Assistant Collector, in adjudi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vant period were not refrigerators inasmuch as their function was just to keep the beverages chilled and not to preserve food items for long periods without deterioration; that the party had never described their bottle coolers as refrigerators in any of their brochures; that the bottle coolers were, in fact, refrigerating appliances covered by the erstwhile Tariff Item No. 29A(1) and, therefore, the concessional rate of 50% ad valorem under the Notification was not available in respect of the goods. Ld. DR submitted that the Collector (Appeals) did not apply his mind to the distinction between refrigerators and other refrigerating appliances under the above Tariff Item as also to the fact that other refrigerating appliances were not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , such as storage refrigerator and service refrigerator. Counsel submitted that the respondents bottle coolers could be considered as storage refrigerators inasmuch as they were box-shaped cabinets suitable for storing 70, 118, 221 or 280 bottles of beer. Counsel also quoted from the 1994 Ashrae Handbook on Refrigeration [by American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc.] and submitted that the bottle coolers were identical to the reach-in cabinets referred to in the said handbook. The reach-in cabinets were specifically described as refrigerators in the handbook. Counsel also relied on the HSN Explanatory Notes. He defended the order of the Collector (Appeals) and prayed for rejecting the Department s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nal rate of duty under Sl. No. 2 of the Table to the Notification. The Tribunal s decision in the case of Sheetal Engineering Works (supra) does not appear to be applicable to the instant case as rightly submitted by ld. Counsel. In that case, the Tribunal held that the bottle coolers manufactured by M/s. Sheetal Enginering Works could not be considered as domestic refrigerators. The relevant question whether the said products were covered by the description of refrigerators under Sl. No. 2 of the Table annexed to Notification No. 252/83 was apparently neither raised nor considered in that case. 6. In view of the findings recorded above, we hold that the respondents bottle coolers manufactured and cleared during the period of dispute wer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
