Decided on October 18,1991



R. Jayaraman, Member (T) - (1.) THIS is an appeal against the Order of the Collector (Appeals) bearing No. 1018/86 -BCH dated 17.6.1986.
(2.) FACTS of the case are the following. The appellants imported a consignment of single metal thick walled bearings for engines of trawlers and claimed clearance as spares for trawlers under OGL Appendix 6 Serial No. 42 (4) of AM 1984 -85 Policy. The said Serial No. 42 (4) of Appendix 6 reads as follows: Spares, except those included in Appendices 2,3 Part A, 4 Part A, 8 and 10 of - (1)... (2)... (3)... (4) Trawlers. Imports permissible to all persons. However, the Department objected to their clearance on the ground that the goods appear against serial No. 438 of Appendix 3 Part A. The item at serial No. 438 of Appendix 3, Part A reads as below: Bimetal/trimetal/multimetal bearings and bushes including engine bearings and bushes, semi -finished/under sized/oversized. In the adjudication proceedings held by the Deputy Collector, it was held that all engine bearings and bushes are covered by their specific inclusion in Serial number 438 of Appx. 3 Part A aforesaid, and hence the goods were not permitted to be cleared under OGL. The goods valued Rs. 34,583/ - were confiscated but allowed redemption on payment of fine of Rs. 15,000/ -. When the matter was taken up before Collector (Appeals) by the appellants, the same was rejected. Hence the appeal before the Tribunal.
(3.) SHRI Pravin Shah, partner of the appellants firm appeared in person and argued as below: (i) Entry against S. No. 438 of Appx. 3 Part A refers to Bimetal/trimetal/multimetal bearings and bushes primarily. Engine bearings of unimetal do not attract the provision of the aforesaid entry. Only those multimetal bearings or bushes of engines arc sought to be covered by that entry. (ii) It is not disputed by the Department that the goods imported are unimetal thick walled bearings for engines of trawlers and hence are spares for trawlers, which can be imported under OGL by all persons. (iii) Reference to other Serial Nos. like S. No. 428, 432(8), 444(a), 470 would show by comparison that the entry against S. No. 438 seeks to cover only multimetal bearing and bushes and the inclusive provision for engine bearings can only be applicable to mullimetal bearings. (iv) The objection of the Deputy Collector that there is a "comma" after "bimetal/trimclal/multimetal bearings and bushes" is not factually correct. There is no comma following the above words in S. No. 438. (v) The Collector (Appeals) is not justified in holding that the word "including" makes addition to the entry already made before it. He sought to rely on the decision of the Supreme Court reported in AIR 1977 (SC) 90 to urge that the form "including" can also specify the items in the' context in which it is used. Shri Naik, the Ld. JDR, countered the above arguments as follows: The term "including" ordinarily expands the scope of the item specified. In this context he referred to the encyclopedic law dictionary by Dr. A.R. Biswas to urge that the term has the effect of enlarging the meaning, by adding to the item specified. He sought to rely on the decision of the Supreme Court reported in 1988 (36) ELT 201, where a similar view has been held. ;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.