TMI Blog1987 (8) TMI 121X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... present bench of three members to hear and dispose the matter. 2. The learned Counsel for M/s. Indian Airlines, Mr. Soli J. Sorabjee, began his arguments by reading Notification No. 99/81 -Cus. It would be seen from the terms employed by this notification, said the learned Counsel, that aeroplane tyres fell in these terms completely. There can be no debate about whether tyres are spare parts of aeroplanes or not they are spare parts of aeroplanes; because they are not only fitted on aeroplanes but are essential for them. The aeroplanes cannot function without the tyres. He referred to a certificate from the Controller of Civil Aviation that the tyres are recorded as spare parts of aeroplanes and that they are essential parts of aeroplane. The aeroplane cannot take off without the tyres. The learned Counsel read a number of judgments which we will list at the end and which, he said, support his arguments. He pointed out that the fuselage of the aeroplane evidently cannot be accepted as a spare part of an aeroplane, but there can be no such rejection where a tyre is concerned. 3. The learned Counsel said that these tyres are imported for servicing the aeroplanes and for this, he ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat aeroplane tyres are not aeroplane spare parts is the most reasonable view, and is to be preferred to the view that such tyres are spare parts of aeroplanes. 7. If tyres are placed in Chapter 40, exemption under Notification No. 99/81 -Cus. will not be available and since there can be no doubt that these tyres fall under Chapter 40, the exemption sought now cannot be given. The learned Counsel then referred to Chapter 88 of the Customs Tariff and pointed out that this Chapter specifically covers aircraft parts, it is only goods falling under this Chapter that can obtain exemption under Notification No. 99/81-Cus. and since tyres fall in Chapter 40, they are disqualified. There was some comment about a notification covering aeroplane parts produced in Burma, but we do not see its significance. 8. To understand the controversy, we will reproduce the two Notifications No. 145/77-Cus. and No. 99/81-Cus. They are short ones and we can understand the difference of opinion more clearly if we see them in print. 145/77-Cus., dated 9-7-1977. In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 25 of the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962), and in supersession of the notifi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts described under these notifications. It is, of course, possible to argue, as the learned SDR, did that the notifications must be read in such a way that none is made in fructuous or null and void; but it is difficult to see why that calamity should be fall them because there appears to be nothing in the exemption giver's mind to judge by his language, that seeks restriction. If a restriction is to be put, it must only be the restriction that no good that does not answer to the descriptions is passed under them. 9. The SDR also argued that the words spare parts should not be given the broad meaning demanded by the importers, but this is to lose sight of the point that when an article is covered, it is given the exemption; the meaning of the words are not being given a wide coverage - they are only being given a meaning to cover what they can legitimately cover. The distinction, therefore, must be not between a wide coverage and a narrow coverage, but between a coverage that the meaning of the words can yield and one that is does not. If the words yield a meaning, it would be a mistake to say that wide coverage is being given simply because it does not appeal to one. There is, o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... heads. It also relied on the fact that in Notification No. 145/77-Cus. tyres and tubes have been shown separately from aeroplane parts. It is indeed not clear why that notification lists aeroplane parts and aeroplane tyres separately when it does not even contain the heading numbers. One might say it was unnecessary; but then we do not know and it makes no difference, because the aim clearly is achieved by giving the desired exemption to aeroplane parts and to aeroplane tyres. 12. But it will be a fallacy to see in this a ruling that an aeroplane tyre is not an aeroplane part. It is possible to see that a gramophone needle and a typewriter ribbon are not parts of the machines in which they are placed, but it is not possible to see an aeroplane tyre in the same role in an aero plane. To deprive aeroplane of its wheel assembly or of the tyre, a very important component, is to ground an aeroplane completely. The aeroplane will not be able to take to the air, because when the wheels are extended to the ground from the body and when the engine roars into life, it is on the tyres in the wheels the plane moves forward, to gather speed and to become airborne. Without the tyres in the whe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
