TMI Blog2000 (12) TMI 408X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vegetables. 2. The facts of the case briefly stated are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture rice-milling machinery with sheet metal components. They filed classification list claiming classification under Chapter Heading 84.37. Prior to the issue of Exemption Notification No. 111/88-C.E., the department approved classification of the goods under Chapter Heading 84.37. However, when the appellants filed fresh classification list after issue of Notification No. 111/88-C.E., the department held that the items manufactured by the appellants were not classifiable as parts exclusively for rice-milling machinery and denied them the benefit of this notification. The adjudicating authority denied them the benefit on the ground that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sed it would be seen that they are fully applicable to the appellants and therefore the goods warranted classification under Chapter 84.37. He also submits that the learned Collector (Appeals) in his order in para 4 has observed that "the impugned items are meant for their exclusive use in these rice mill machines". Therefore, he submits that this observation of the Collector (Appeals) supports their case not only for classification but also for admissibility of the benefit of exemption Notification No. 118/88-C.E. The learned Consultant also refers to the judgment of this Tribunal in the case of Thermax Ltd. v. CCE as reported in 1996 (81) E.L.T. 417 and observed that complex systems incorporating many devices and having multiple use and n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e gone through the chapter notes 2 to 4 and we note that chapter notes 3 and 4 of Chapter 84 supports the view of the appellants. We have also gone through the observation of the Collector (Appeals). We find that in para 4 of his order, he held that the sheet metal components manufactured by the appellants were exclusively for use in the rice-milling industries. Thus we find that these observations of the Collector (Appeals) support the view of the appellants that the goods are classifiable under Heading 84.37. 6. We have also perused the case law cited and relied upon by the learned Consultant in the case of Thermax Ltd. v. CCE (supra) we find that identical view was expressed by this Tribunal after examining the technical literature, pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
