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.

Commissioner of Customs Vs. Speciality Valves

Commissioner of Customs vs Speciality Valves

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Jul 14, 2006
~4 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/43121

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
Land Acquisition

Case Summary

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

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue
Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Commissioner of Customs

Respondent

Speciality Valves

Legal References

Reported In
(2006)(112)ECC320

Excerpt

.....subject spray pump m08 shows that the same is intended for smaller capacity containers with smaller dimension necks and that its reduced output is specially suitable for alcohol based fragrances and pharmaceutical products. the importer is not manufacturing scent spray but are only manufacturing spray pumps which could be put to use by their suppliers in making scent spray, toilet spray, chemical spray, etc. further, it is observed that the spray pumps manufactured by the importer are not specially churned out as parts of scent sprays. those are general pumps which could be used for scents as well as chemicals pharmaceuticals. chapter tariff heading 9616 covers only scent sprays and similar toilet sprays, mounts and heads. the imported goods are parts which are not mounts and head for scent sprays or toilet sprays as such or parts exclusively of the same. the said sprays being mechanical appliances for spraying liquids are classifiable under sub-heading 8429.89 as "mechanical appliances for projecting, dispersing or spraying liquids or powder or other appliances".accordingly to the explanatory notes to hsn on chapter 8424, the heading does not include scent sprays or similar toiler sprays of heading 9616.4. the contention of the department is that these goods are not of the type listed in heading 8424. the plea of the importer is that they are not in the business of manufacturing scents/toiletries/sprays and therefore the goods in question are excluded from heading 9616. this assessment on the part of the importer is irrelevant since they have admitted that the manufactured items will be sold as sprays which can be used for spraying scents, toiletries or other chemicals. it is clear that the articles are to be manufactured i.e. sprays are for general purpose type of sprays which is normally used for spraying scents/toiletries and can also be used for spraying chemicals while the goods under heading 8424. the goods cover under heading 9616 are specialized type of.....

Full Judgment

1. The revenue is in appeal, aggrieved by an order dated 29.12.1998 passed y the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), New Custom House, Mumbai wherein the Order-in-Original dated 19.10.1996 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai is set aside.

2. M/s. Speciality Valves, Prop. Lion Holding (P) Ltd., F-2, Kailash Plaza, Sant Nagar, New Delhi, herein referred to as the Importer filed Bill of Entry No. 006287 dated 15.04.96 for clearance of the following items described by them as parts of M08 Spray Pumps classified the same under Chapter Tariff Heading No. 8424.90: The Assistant Commissioner, Customs, held that the goods are to be classified under CTH 9616.10 of Customs Tariff Act, 1975, whereas on filing the appeal by the importer, the Commissioner of Customs (A) held that the goods are classifiable under CTH 8424.90 as parts of Dispenser. The impugned order is reviewed by the Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai and found the same as neither legal nor proper and authorized, the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, New Custom House, Mumbai to file an appeal before the Tribunal. Hence this appeal.

3. The Commissioner of Customs (A), Mumbai has observed the imported goods as components of M08 Spray Pumps. The Literature with regard to the subject Spray Pump M08 shows that the same is intended for smaller capacity containers with smaller dimension necks and that its reduced output is specially suitable for alcohol based fragrances and pharmaceutical products. The Importer is not manufacturing scent spray but are only manufacturing spray pumps which could be put to use by their suppliers in making scent spray, toilet spray, chemical spray, etc. Further, it is observed that the Spray Pumps manufactured by the importer are not specially churned out as parts of scent sprays. Those are general pumps which could be used for scents as well as chemicals Pharmaceuticals. Chapter Tariff Heading 9616 covers only scent sprays and similar toilet sprays, mounts and heads. The imported goods are parts which are not mounts and head for scent sprays or toilet sprays as such or parts exclusively of the same. The said sprays being mechanical appliances for spraying liquids are classifiable under Sub-heading 8429.89 as "mechanical appliances for projecting, dispersing or spraying liquids or powder or other appliances".

Accordingly to the explanatory Notes to HSN on Chapter 8424, the heading does not include scent sprays or similar toiler sprays of heading 9616.

4. The contention of the department is that these goods are not of the type listed in heading 8424. The plea of the importer is that they are not in the business of manufacturing scents/toiletries/sprays and therefore the goods in question are excluded from heading 9616. This assessment on the part of the importer is irrelevant since they have admitted that the manufactured items will be sold as sprays which can be used for spraying scents, toiletries or other chemicals. It is clear that the articles are to be manufactured i.e. sprays are for general purpose type of sprays which is normally used for spraying scents/toiletries and can also be used for spraying chemicals while the goods under heading 8424. The goods cover under Heading 9616 are specialized type of machine which are of industrial use. Thus as the goods are more specifically covered under Heading 9616, they merit classification under CTH 961610.00.

5. After reading the explanatory note under the two competing headings, we find that heading 9616 would be more appropriate to cover the impugned inputs. The grounds taken by the Revenue as regards to the admission of the importer about the use of these goods would compel us to classify them under chapter heading 9616. The finding of the commissioner that the goods are not exclusively meant for scent sprays but could be used as well for chemicals and Pharmaceuticals will not rule out classification under Chapter heading 9616. The commissioner has noted that explanatory notes under heading 8424 does not include scent sprays and similar toilet sprays. He also found that the goods were not having technical characteristics for use as scent or similar sprays. In the above said circumstances the learned commissioner ought to have taken a view that 9616 would be more appropriate because the goods are not included by the notes under Chapter 8424 and these are not technical parameters in the notes for the goods to fall under 9616, therefore the impugned order is liable to be set aside. As we find merits in Revenue appeal, the same is allowed.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial