Full Judgment
Therefore, the appeal is being taken up for final disposal in the absence of the respondents.
2. The Revenue filed this appeal against the Order-in-Appeal dated 24-9-1985 passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals), Bombay and in the impugned order, the Collector of Customs held that the Plate Processor Machine, the Automatic Plate Processor is classifiable under Heading No. 84.34 of the Customs Tariff and is not classifiable under Heading No. 90.10 of the Customs Tariff.
3. Shri R.S. Sangia, JDR appeared on behalf of the appellants/Revenue submits that the Automatic Plate Processor imported by the appellants is classifiable under Heading No. 90.10 of the Customs Tariff as it is a similar to Photographic Processor. He submits that the Automatic Plate Processor is working on the principal features of photographic method. He also submits that the machine imported is a processor of pre-sensitized plates employing a method similar to the photographic processor. He relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Thomson Press (I) Ltd. v. CC, Bombay 1996 (62) ECR 676 (Tribunal) and submits that in this case the Tribunal had held that Automatic Plate Processor is classifiable under Heading No. 9010.20 of the Customs Tariff.
4. We have heard Shri R.S. Sangia, JDR and considered the submissions and perused the appeal papers.
5. In this case the respondents made import of Automatic Plate Processor. The adjudicating authority had held that the Automatic Plate Processor is classifiable under Heading No. 90.10 of the Customs Tariff. On appeal filed by the respondents, the Collector of Customs (Appeals) held that the Automatic Plate Processor is classifiable under Heading No. 84.34 of the Customs Tariff.
6. We find that the issue is covered by the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Thomson Press (I) Ltd. (supra). In the case, the Tribunal had held that Automatic Plate Processor is working on photographic principles and they are classifiable under Chapter 90 of the Customs Tariff. The Tribunal had held as under :- "15. Taking all the relevant considerations into account we hold that the plate processor under consideration in all the three appeals is correctly assessable to Customs duty under Heading No. 90.10, sub-heading No. 9010.20 of the Tariff. Accordingly the appeal filed by the Revenue in Appeal No. 1632/85-B2 is allowed, and the appeals filed by M/s. Thomson Press are rejected." 7. We find that the issue is covered by the decision of the Tribunal.
Respectively, following the ratio of the decision of the Tribunal, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed. Ordered accordingly.