Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 1988 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
1988 (2) TMI 301 - AT - Central Excise
Issues: Assessment of imported pump under Customs Tariff Heading 84.10 vs. 84.59
In this judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, the dispute revolves around the assessment of a pump imported by M/s. Hindustan Sanitaryware & Industries known as a sand piper pump with combination filter, lubricator, and regulator. The Assistant Collector initially assessed the pump under Heading 84.59, which covers machines and mechanical appliances, while the Collector of Customs (Appeals) decided that the pump should be assessed under Heading 84.10, which pertains to pumps for liquids. The key contention was whether the pump, designed to handle materials like ceramic slips, ore concentrate, and sewage, should be considered a pump for liquids or a machine for handling solids suspended in liquids. The Collector of Customs (Appeals) reasoned that the pump should be classified under Heading 84.10 as it is primarily used for pumping liquids, even though it can accommodate solids smaller than 1/4" in diameter. The tribunal noted that the design of the pump, being a diaphragm pump powered by compressed air, is suitable for handling liquids with suspended solids. The presence of solids in the liquid being pumped does not disqualify the pump from being classified as a pump for liquids. The tribunal emphasized that diaphragm pumps, like the sand piper pump in question, are specifically designed for pumping liquids, and the presence of solids in the liquid does not alter their classification. The engineering principle behind using diaphragm pumps for liquids carrying solids is to ensure smoother and more efficient movement of materials. The tribunal highlighted that the pump's function is to move the liquid, which in turn carries the solids, making it a pump for liquids rather than a machine for handling solids. The tribunal also considered industry standards and expert opinions, including references from the Chemical Engineers Handbook, to support the classification of the pump as a pump for liquids. The importance of hydraulic performance, material durability, and considerations for handling solids in pump selection were discussed to reinforce the classification decision. The judgment underscored that the pump's operation focuses on moving the liquid containing suspended solids, aligning with the classification under Heading 84.10 for pumps for liquids. Ultimately, the tribunal concluded that Heading 84.10, "Pumps for liquids," was more appropriate for the sand piper pump than Heading 84.59, which covers machines with individual functions. The assessment of the pump was directed to be made in accordance with the classification under Heading 84.10, as determined by the Collector of Customs (Appeals).
|