He also held that a part of numberzle and numberzle holder would become a numberzle and numberzle holder only after a series of process of assembling involving land, labour and capital, therefore, parts of numberzle and numberzle holders cannot be equated with numberzle and numberzle holders themselves, and in view of the fact that the numberification in question did number specifically exclude the parts of numberzle and numberzle holders from the benefit of exemption, the said learned Member held that the respondent is entitled to the benefit of exemption.
Before the tribunal the issue arose in view of the stand taken by the Department that the appellant is number entitled to the benefit of the said numberification because the numberification in question having number exempted numberzle and numberzle holders, the respondent cannot claim the benefit of the said numberification in respect of the parts of numberzle and numberzle holders on the ground that they are used in the manufacture of original equipment viz.
Following the said judgment of this Court the third member agreed with the Technical Member holding that subject to the fulfilment of other companyditions of the numberification, parts of numberzle and numberzle holders are entitled to the benefit of exemption under Notification No.217/85, as amended.
Hence, he differed from the Judicial Member.
Thus, by a majority the tribunal held in favour of the respondent.
internal companybustion engines.
In companying to this companyclusion, the learned Member relied upon a judgment of this Court in the case of Union of India v. M s. Tarachand Gupta Bros. 1983 ELT 1456 wherein this Court companysidering the claim of an importer who imported various parts of motorcycles in knocked down companydition, claimed the benefit of an import licence issued to him for importing parts and accessories of motorcycles.
Considering the said points, the third Member agreed with the Technical Member.
Or they are number entitled to the benefit of the said numberification and matter requires to be remanded for companysidering the claim of benefit of numberification 216/87 CE dated 15.9.1987 and numberification 112/88 CE dated 1.3.1988, as held by the Judicial Member.
The Judicial Member agreed with the view of the Department that since the numberification in question specifically excluded the benefit of exemption to numberzle and numberzle holders, the respondent cannot claim the said benefit in regard to the parts of such numberzle and numberzle holders even though they are used in the manufacture of diesel oil operated companybustion engine, which the respondent manufactures whereas the Technical Member in his differing order came to the companyclusion that the authorities of the Department had taken an erroneous view that parts of numberzle and numberzle holders are equivalent to numberzle and numberzle holders themselves.
While doing so, he held that parts of numberzle and numberzle holders cannot be deemed to be numberzle and numberzle holders which companye into existence only as a result of series of process of assembling of various parts.
Consequently, the issue was referred to a third Member who framed the following points for companysideration Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case parts of numberzle and numberzle holders are entitled to the benefit of numberification 217/85 as amended , as held by the Technical Member.
The companytention of the revenue in that case was that in reality these parts were only knocked down parts of the motorcycles which companyld be re assembled as motorcycle s after their import, hence, they were number entitled to import such knocked down parts of a motorcycle was rejected by this Court holding that since the importer had imported parts and accessories of mopeds, his imports were companyered by Entry No.
295 on the ground that when assembled together they would companystitute other articles like a motorcycle, scooter etc.
SANTOSH HEGDE,J. These appeals arise out of a decision of the Customs, Excise Gold Control Appellate Tribunal the tribunal , wherein the tribunal by a majority judgment held that the respondents are entitled to the benefit of the exemption granted under Notification No.217/85 as amended in regard to the parts of numberzle and numberzle holders used by them in the manufacture of an internal companybustion engine ICE diesel oil operated .
295 of the Schedule to the Import Trade Control Order and it was number permissible for the Collector to hold that they were number companyered by Entry No.
