B.H.E.L. Vs. Collector of Customs

.....notification. the relevant catalogue of the components and assembly drawings for the turbine were also submitted. the collector (appeals), however, rejected the appeal as unsubstantiated since he could not connect these items with those shown in the drawings.2. in the revision application filed before the central government and which has been transferred to the tribunal for disposal as an appeal u/s 131b(2) of the customs act, 1962, the appellants have submitted the end-use affidavit, the essentiality certificate, the drawings and the catalogue. they also submitted additional documents, namely, drawing of g.v. servomotor indicator and drawings of electro hydraulic governor which show the actual use of the potentiometers and the displacement transducers as components of the water turbine.3. the sr. departmental representative maintains that the appeal was rightly rejected by the appellate collector because these documents had not been produced before him. he has, however, no objection to the admission of the appeal if these additional documents are admitted by the bench.4. the bench has considered carefully the submissions made by both the parties and admits the additional evidence given by the appellants. the goods are clearly the component parts of water turbine which are classified under tariff item no. 84.07 cta, 1975 and eligible for exemption of customs duty under notification no. 35/79 dated 15-2-1979 as amended. the bench therefore, sets aside the order of the appellate collector and allows the appeal.