Andhra Patrika Vs. Collector of Customs

Andhra Patrika vs Collector of Customs

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi Decided May 11, 1983

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/315

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/315
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided On: May 11, 1983
Subject: Customs

Case Summary

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

Customs

Key legal issue: Customs

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Andhra Patrika

Respondent

Collector of Customs

Legal References

Reported In: (1983)LC1416DTri(Delhi)

Excerpt

2. the appellants seek the benefit of lower rate of duty provided for in exemption notification no. 11/77-cus. in respect of bobline 45 automatic film processor imported by them for use in their printing industry. the only ground on which their claim has been rejected by the lower authorities is that the subject machine is an automatic film processing as well as paper processing machine and that the exemption is meant for a machine which is exclusively on automatic film processor. the same objection was reiterated by the department's representative before us. on referring to notification no. 11/77-cus., we find that there is no such stipulation therein that the automatic film processor covered thereunder should be exclusively for film processing only. we find that this notification lays down only two conditions : - (1) it should be an automatic film processor falling under heading no. 90.10 of the customs tariff act, 1975, and we find that both these conditions are fulfilled in the case before us.if, in addition to film processing the machine can perform the other function of paper processing as well, the exemption cannot be denied.accordingly, we allow this appeal with consequential relief to the appellants.

Full Judgment

2. The appellants seek the benefit of lower rate of duty provided for in exemption Notification No. 11/77-Cus. in respect of Bobline 45 Automatic Film Processor imported by them for use in their printing industry. The only ground on which their claim has been rejected by the lower authorities is that the subject machine is an automatic film processing as well as paper processing machine and that the exemption is meant for a machine which is exclusively on automatic film processor. The same objection was reiterated by the Department's representative before us. On referring to Notification No. 11/77-Cus., we find that there is no such stipulation therein that the automatic film processor covered thereunder should be exclusively for film processing only. We find that this notification lays down only two conditions : - (1) it should be an automatic film processor falling under heading No. 90.10 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, and We find that both these conditions are fulfilled in the case before us.

If, in addition to film processing the machine can perform the other function of paper processing as well, the exemption cannot be denied.

Accordingly, we allow this appeal with consequential relief to the appellants.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delh... Same Parties Andhra Patrika vs Collector of Customs Same Subject Customs