Indian Equipment Corporation Vs. Collector of C. Ex.

Indian Equipment Corporation vs Collector of C. Ex.

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi Decided Mar 10, 2000

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/17841

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/17841
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided On: Mar 10, 2000
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

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

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Indian Equipment Corporation

Respondent

Collector of C. Ex.

Legal References

Reported In: (2001)(130)ELT599TriDel

Excerpt

.....condensers/compressors and refrigerating machinery and since refrigeration and air-conditioning machinery and parts thereof are excluded from the ambit of notification no. 155/86 benefit under the notification is not available.2. the appellants have asked for a decision on merits and hence we heard the ld. d.r. and perused the records.3. there is [no] dispute that centrifuges fall for classification under sub-heading 8421.00 of the schedule to the central excise tariff act, 1985. therefore, on a plain reading of the notification no. 69/90 they are eligible to the benefit of notification and therefore we set aside the impugned order denying the benefit of the above mentioned notification to centrifuges. as regards the other item we note that the assessees have clearly stated in their appeal memorandum that although the baths are with cooling system, they do not have any air-conditioning devices and are not fitted with the condensors or compressors and hence cannot be regarded as parts of refrigeration or air-conditioning machinery so as to exclude them from the benefit of notification no. 155/86. we also note that the denial by the assistant commissioner whose findings have been confirmed by the collector (appeals) for the reason is that there is possibility of the same baths being provided with condensers/compressors for refrigeration machinery.this is not a ground for denying the benefit when there is no dispute that the item does not contain condensers/compressors and no dispute it is not a part of the refrigeration and air-conditioning machineries.therefore, we hold the benefit of notification no. 155/86 is available to the "baths other than cryostat". the impugned order is set aside in respect of this item and the appeal is allowed.

Full Judgment

1. In this case the appellants claimed the benefit of the Notification No. 69/90-C.E. in terms of Sl. No. 2 of the Table annexed thereto, for Centrifuge falling under Sub-Heading 8421.00 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and the benefit of Notification No.155/86 to "Baths other than cryostat" falling under Heading 8419.00.

The lower appellate authority has denied the benefit of Notification No. 69/90 even though Sl. No. 2 of the Notification exempts goods under sub-heading 8421.00 from duty in excess of that specified in Col. No.4; the ground for denial of benefit of Notification No. 155/86 to "other baths" is that they have cleared cooling system which have the possibility of being provided with condensers/compressors and refrigerating machinery and since refrigeration and air-conditioning machinery and parts thereof are excluded from the ambit of Notification No. 155/86 benefit under the Notification is not available.

2. The appellants have asked for a decision on merits and hence we heard the ld. D.R. and perused the records.

3. There is [no] dispute that Centrifuges fall for classification under sub-heading 8421.00 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. Therefore, on a plain reading of the Notification No. 69/90 they are eligible to the benefit of notification and therefore we set aside the impugned order denying the benefit of the above mentioned Notification to Centrifuges. As regards the other item we note that the assessees have clearly stated in their appeal memorandum that although the baths are with cooling system, they do not have any air-conditioning devices and are not fitted with the condensors or compressors and hence cannot be regarded as parts of Refrigeration or air-conditioning machinery so as to exclude them from the benefit of Notification No. 155/86. We also note that the denial by the Assistant Commissioner whose findings have been confirmed by the Collector (Appeals) for the reason is that there is possibility of the same baths being provided with condensers/compressors for refrigeration machinery.

This is not a ground for denying the benefit when there is no dispute that the item does not contain condensers/compressors and no dispute it is not a part of the refrigeration and air-conditioning machineries.

Therefore, we hold the benefit of Notification No. 155/86 is available to the "baths other than cryostat". The impugned order is set aside in respect of this item and the appeal is allowed.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delh... Same Parties Indian Equipment Corporation vs Collector of C. Ex. Same Subject Land Acquisition