Judgment:
1. In this appeal filed by M/s. Hekotronics (P) Ltd., Bombay, the matter relates to the classification of the products described as (1) Static Ringers and Tone Generator, and (2) Printed Circuit Board. These goods were used in line telephony. The appellants had classified these products under Heading No. 9030.00, which covers the following :-Heading No. Description of Goods----------- ---------------------9030 "Oscilloscopes, spectrum analysers and other instruments and apparatus for The Revenue had sought to classify these goods under Heading No.8517.00,Heading No. Description of Goods----------- ----------------------8517.00 "Electrical apparatus for line telephony or line telegraphy including such apparatus 2. The notice for today's hearing had been issued to the appellants on 13-8-1996. There is no response. The matter was originally posted on 12-9-1996 and was passed over to 13-9-1996. There is no response from the appellants. There is no request for any adjournment. As the matter is very old and the classification lists pertained to the year 1986, we are proceeding to deal with the matter on merits after hearing Shri P.K. Jain, SDR, who is present for the respondent / Revenue.
3. Shri P.K. Jain, SDR, referred to the respective Tariff entries and submitted that the appellants themselves had admitted in appeal before the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) that their products were used in line telephony. They have challenged the classification under Heading No. 8517.00 only on the ground that their goods were a single instrument and that the expression 'apparatus' covers only a group of instruments. The ld. SDR submitted that it is not necessary that an electrical apparatus should be a group of instruments.
4. We have carefully considered the matter. The Tariff Heading Nos.
8517.00 and 9030.00 had been extracted above. Chapter-90 covers optical Photographic, Cinematographic, Measuring, Checking, Precision, Medical or Surgical Instruments and Apparatus; Parts and Accessories thereof.
The appellants have admitted in their appeal before the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) that their products were used in Line Telephony. The Heading No. 8517.00 specifically covers Electrical Apparatus for Line Telephony.
5. The appellants have contended that their product is a single instrument and not a group of instruments. According to them, a single instrument would not be covered by the expression 'apparatus'. As per the Dictionary meaning of the term 'apparatus' as set out in various dictionaries, it is defined as an appliance and the term 'appliance' has been defined as a device or a piece of equipment. The term 'appliance' in the Law - Lexicon has been defined as under :- From the meanings given by different dictionaries "it becomes clear that (1) an "appliance" is quite distinct from "materials" from which it is made, and (2) an "appliance", as an apparatus, device or instrument is "a means to an end". These two aspects should be borne in mind while considering whether a particular article can be called an appliance. The first aspect seeks to take an integrated view of the article concerned and says that materials or component parts of an appliance should not be mistaken as tantamount to the appliance itself. The second aspect emphasises the fact that the importance of an appliance consists in its utility to serve the object for which it is possessed." 6. The Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) had referred to the use of goods under consideration and had observed that the appellants have admitted that their product was an Electrical Instrument used in telecommunication. Having regard to all the facts and circumstances of the case, we find no infirmity in the order passed by Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay. We find no merit in this appeal and the same is rejected. Ordered accordingly.