Are you looking for a legal research tool ?
Get Started
Do check other products like LIBIL, a legal due diligence tool to get a litigation check report and Case Management tool to monitor and collaborate on cases.

Good Year India Limited v. Collector Of Customs, Bombay

Good Year India Limited v. Collector Of Customs, Bombay

(Supreme Court Of India)

Civil Appeal No. 2049-55 Of 1988 With Civil Appeal No. 6672 Of 1997 | 25-09-1997

The only question that falls for consideration in these appeals is whether inner tube valves imported by the appellants in connection with the manufacture of tubes for tyres are classifiable under sub-heading (1) of Heading 84.61 of Customs Tariff as claimed by the Revenue or under sub-heading (2) of Heading 84.61 as claimed by the appellants. Heading 84.61 of the Customs Tariff reads as under :

"Taps, cocks values and similar appliances for pipes, boiler, shells, tanks, vats and the like, including pressure reducing valves and thermostatically controlled valves.

(1) Not elsewhere specified.

(2) Isolating valves, non-return valves, safety valves, pressure reducing valves, exhaust relief valves, thermostatically controlled valves, solenoid operated valves; valves made of corrosion-resisting material such as stainless steel, nickel monel, incoloy, hastelloy and other valves lines with rubber or other corrosion-resisting materials; steam traps." *

2. The valves are made of copper alloy and the appellants have produced certificates of the manufacturers in support of their claim that the valves were made of corrosion-resisting material. In these circumstances, the authorities should have procured on the basis that the valves were made of corrosion resisting material and merely because they are made of copper alloy would not disentitle the appellants from claiming that they fall under sub-heading (2). The words "such as stainless steel, nickel monel, incoloy, hastelloy" in sub-heading (2) are only illustrative of the various metals from which valves can be made but the said description is not exhaustive of the metals. If the material from which the valves are made is a corrosion-resisting material then the valves would fall under sub-heading (2) of Heading 84.61. In these circumstances, we are unable to uphold the impugned judgments and it must be held that the valves imported by the appellants, being made of corrosion-resisting material, would fall under sub-heading (2) of Heading 84.61 of the Customs Tariff. The appeals are accordingly allowed and the impugned judgments are set aside. No order as to costs.

Advocate List
  • For
Bench
  • HON'BLE JUSTICE S. C. AGRAWAL
  • HON'BLE JUSTICE B. N. KIRPAL
Eq Citations
  • AIR 1999 SC 1558
  • (2000) 10 SCC 489
  • 1997 (95) ELT 450 (SC)
  • LQ/SC/1997/1304
Head Note

CUSTOMS AND EXCISE — Customs Tariff Act, 1975 — Heading 84.61 — Classifiability of inner tube valves imported by appellants in connection with manufacture of tubes for tyres — Held, valves are made of copper alloy and appellants have produced certificates of manufacturers in support of their claim that valves were made of corrosion-resisting material — Authorities should have procured on basis that valves were made of corrosion resisting material — Merely because they are made of copper alloy would not disentitle appellants from claiming that they fall under sub-heading (2) — Words "such as stainless steel, nickel monel, incoloy, hastelloy" in sub-heading (2) are only illustrative of various metals from which valves can be made but said description is not exhaustive of metals — If material from which valves are made is corrosion-resisting material then valves would fall under sub-heading (2) of Heading 84.61 — Impugned judgments set aside — Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, S. 3