TMI Blog1983 (2) TMI 284X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1), as urged by the appellants. According to the appellant s written statement made in the revision application (since transferred to this Tribunal and dealt with as the subject appeal), these pipes are made of 60% asbestos and 40% phenobic resin and are used to convey a fluid consisting of 33% hydrochloric acid and fines of titanium dioxide under 125 pounds pressure per square inch and at 230oC temperature. The pipes were imported in standard length of 10 feet each. 2. The case was heard by us on 28-2-1983. The appellants showed a cut piece of the subject pipe by way of sample and produced photo copies of the manufacturer s catalogue, the supplier s certificate dated 16-10-1978 and past proceedings before the Departmental authorities i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the terminal point. Cut the pipes or fittings to the exact length required unless expansion joints are used, allowing space for the expansion joints. Avoid spring fits which cause mechanical stress. The technical write-up furnished by the appellants themselves says that- The only operation involved in item Nos. 1, 6 and 7 (termed as Pipes) is only cutting (which is minor operation) at site and assembling the same as Stuffing Box with acid resisting cement along with the other above items. Since the internal diameter varies in almost all 23 digestors due to brick to lining, it is not possible to get the pipes in required lengths and that is why we have got the pipes in convenient lengths. These above items are very costly and we c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s shall be classified as if they consisted of the material or component which gives the goods their essential character. The question, therefore, is to decide whether plastic/synthetic resins give the subject goods their essential character, or it is the asbestos which does so. We find from the records that in 1973, when a classification dispute arose in respect of similar goods imported under Bill of Entry No. D-1902 dated 27-3-1973, the appellants produced a certificate to the Assistant Collector that the material composition of the goods consisted of 60% asbestos and 40% resin. The appellants maintained this stand throughout before the Appellate Collector and the Government of India and also repeated it in the subject revision applicatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... held as articles of plastic/ synthetic resin, falling under Heading 39.07. In coming to this conclusion, we are conscious of the fact that in the past another Appellate Collector and also the Government of India, while considering the classification of similar goods imported earlier, held that the goods were not articles of plastic falling under Item 82(3) of the erstwhile Indian Customs Tariff but were parts of machinery falling under Item 72(3) ICT. But we find that the tariff law under which the aforesaid two authorities took their particular decision was different from the present one under which we are called upon to consider the subject appeal. The present tariff under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 is not only differently worded but a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
