Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

intel Design Systems (i) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commr. of C. Ex.

intel Design Systems (i) Pvt. Ltd. vs Commr. of C. Ex.

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Jun 10, 2002
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/28365

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

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Miscellaneous

Case Summary

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

Miscellaneous

Key legal issue
Miscellaneous

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

intel Design Systems (i) Pvt. Ltd.

Respondent

Commr. of C. Ex.

Legal References

Reported In
(2002)(144)ELT559Tri(Mum.)bai

Excerpt

1. the application is for waiver of deposit of duty of rs. 1,26,856/-.the applicant is absent and unrepresented despite notice. we have read the stay application and heard the departmental representative.2. the duty has been demanded on the ground that the power supply unit for tanks manufactured by the applicant are correctly classifiable under heading 85.36 of the tariff as apparatus for switching or protecting electrical circuits or for making connections to or in electric circuits and not under heading 87.10 claimed by the assessee, as parts of tanks and other fighting vehicles.3. the assessee's contention is that since the goods are supplied on the orders of the ministry of finance for fitment to tanks and such other vehicle they must be considered to be parts. we are prima facie unable to accept this contention. the heading proposed by the department appears to us to be more appropriate. the goods are in any case prima facie excluded from classification in chapter 87 by note 2(f) to section xvi in which chapter 87 falls. this note excludes consideration of electric machinery and equipment as parts or parts and accessories of goods falling in chapter 87 even if identifiable as for the goods for that section.4. the decisions cited by the applicant does not seem to have any relevance to the issue before us. the claim of financial hardship is not supported by any evidence. we do not see how the copies of the income tax returns that have been furnished establish this claim. we, therefore, direct deposit by the applicant of rs. 80,000/- within a month from the receipt of this order, upon which we waive deposit of the remaining duty and stay its recovery.

Full Judgment

1. The application is for waiver of deposit of duty of Rs. 1,26,856/-.

The applicant is absent and unrepresented despite notice. We have read the stay application and heard the Departmental Representative.

2. The duty has been demanded on the ground that the power supply unit for tanks manufactured by the applicant are correctly classifiable under Heading 85.36 of the tariff as apparatus for switching or protecting electrical circuits or for making connections to or in electric circuits and not under Heading 87.10 claimed by the assessee, as parts of tanks and other fighting vehicles.

3. The assessee's contention is that since the goods are supplied on the orders of the Ministry of Finance for fitment to tanks and such other vehicle they must be considered to be parts. We are prima facie unable to accept this contention. The heading proposed by the department appears to us to be more appropriate. The goods are in any case prima facie excluded from classification in Chapter 87 by Note 2(f) to Section XVI in which Chapter 87 falls. This note excludes consideration of electric machinery and equipment as parts or parts and accessories of goods falling in Chapter 87 even if identifiable as for the goods for that section.

4. The decisions cited by the applicant does not seem to have any relevance to the issue before us. The claim of financial hardship is not supported by any evidence. We do not see how the copies of the income tax returns that have been furnished establish this claim. We, therefore, direct deposit by the applicant of Rs. 80,000/- within a month from the receipt of this order, upon which we waive deposit of the remaining duty and stay its recovery.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial