TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1991 (7) TMI 171
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pondents. [Order per: Harish Chander, Vice President]. - Collector of Customs, Bombay, has filed an appeal being aggrieved from the order passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals) Bombay. Collector of Customs (Appeals) Bombay had disposed of three appeals by a common order. The original appeal was received in the Registry on the 16th day of October, 1984 and the supplementary appeals were re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pellant discovered that two more appeals have to be filed. The bona fide of the appellant should not be doubted. We are of the view that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause in the late filing of the supplementary appeals. The delay in the filing of the appeals is condoned. 5. Shri L.P. Asthana, learned Advocate, who has appeared on behalf of the respondent, pleaded that the miscellane....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s. 7. Shri L.P. Asthana, Id. Advocate, stated that the nature of the valves is not disputed by the appellant and these are pressure reducing valves, and the matter is covered by earlier decisions of the Tribunal in the case of Krishna & Co. v. Collector of Customs, Bombay, reported in 1983 (14) E.L.T. 2017, BHEL v. Collector of Customs, reported in 1989 (42) E.L.T. 68A and Central Railway Bombay ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the imported goods is pressure reducing valve, it would fall under Item 84.61(2) and if not pressure reducing valve and is considered an integral part of the machines it would attract Item 84.10 of the CTA. The matter would have to be remanded for a de novo examination in the light of observation made in the order." In the case of Central Railway Bombay v. Collector of Customs, Bombay, reported ....