This unit can be moved from place to place without any necessity of erection at sight.
Not satisfied with the judgment of the CEGAT the assessee has preferred this appeal reiterating all pleas which were negatived by the Appellate Tribunal.
The appellant did number produce original catalogue literature or working manual of the machines but relied upon Xerox companyy of some literature before the Assistant Collector of Customs who after examination of such material rightly found However from Xerox companyy it is seen that sketch as revealed in xerox companyy goes to show that this is a independent ready assembled unit having caster for universal movement and therefore does number require erection at site.
3,44,986.55 was filed before the authorities of the Custom Department in the year 1980.
The Assistant Collector of Customs vide his Order dated 12.11,1981 rejected the claim vide Annexure G, The appeals preferred before the Appeal Collector and Appellate Tribunal were rejected on 31 .1.1983 and 23.5.1985 respectively, We have heard the learned companynsel appearing for the parties and perused the relevant record.
1999 2 SCR 919 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SETHI, J. The short point in companytroversy is as to whether.
Feeling thai the appellant was number liable to pay the duty, the refund claim for Rs.
Can Filler, Fruit Feeder and Ripple Machine are accessories to the companytinuance ice cream freezer or are independent machines companyered by Chapter 84.19 and 84.30 1 , The Customs, Excise and Gold Control Appellate Tribunal for short CEG AT held that the three items did number merit classification under heading 84.15 1 and dismissed the appeals.
