Garware Plastics and Polyester Vs. Collector of C. Ex.

Garware Plastics and Polyester vs Collector of C. Ex.

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi Decided Feb 09, 1998

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/12821

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/12821
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided On: Feb 09, 1998
Subject: MRTP

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

MRTP

Key legal issue: MRTP

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Garware Plastics and Polyester

Respondent

Collector of C. Ex.

Legal References

Reported In: (1998)(101)ELT196TriDel

Excerpt

1. case called. no ppeared on behalf of the appellants. however, there was a request from them on decide the case on merits. accordingly, we proceed to pass this order after tearing shri d.s. negi, learned dr for the revenue.2. the point to be considered in this case is whether "radiator fan" is lassifiable as part of the engine under heading 84.09 as claimed by the party or under heading 87.08 as part of the vehicles as per department.3. the claim of the party that it is a part of the engine has not been ubstantiated with any evidence. on the other hand, we find in the record that is only a part of the vehicle and the department was right in treating it as part of the vehicle and classifying under sub-heading no. 8708.00. we do not find any infirmity in the impugned order passed by the collector (appeals) in classifying the goods. in view of the above, we uphold the impugned order tnd, accordingly, the appeal filed by the party is hereby dismissed.

Full Judgment

1. Case called. No ppeared on behalf of the appellants. However, there was a request from them on decide the case on merits. Accordingly, we proceed to pass this order after tearing Shri D.S. Negi, learned DR for the Revenue.

2. The point to be considered in this case is whether "Radiator fan" is lassifiable as part of the Engine under Heading 84.09 as claimed by the party or under Heading 87.08 as part of the Vehicles as per department.

3. The claim of the party that it is a part of the Engine has not been ubstantiated with any evidence. On the other hand, we find in the record that is only a part of the vehicle and the department was right in treating it as part of the vehicle and classifying under sub-heading No. 8708.00. We do not find any infirmity in the impugned order passed by the Collector (Appeals) in classifying the goods. In view of the above, we uphold the impugned order tnd, accordingly, the appeal filed by the party is hereby dismissed.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delh... Same Parties Garware Plastics and Polyester vs Collector of C. Ex. Same Subject MRTP