- (1.) The appellant is in appeal against the order of the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal). The Tribunals finding relates to hearing-aid earphones and stands equated to micro phones and earphones in terms of Tariff Item No. 85.18 of the Central Excise Tariff.
(2.) The matter came up for consideration before the Tribunal by reason of the levy of countervailing duty which has been challenged on the ground that hearing aids fall under Tariff Item 90.21 read with the Notification No. 71/86 dated 10-2-1986 providing concessional rate of duty which excludes payment of another countervailing duty.
(3.) As noticed above the Notification No. 71/86 issued under the Central Excises and Salt Act pertains to Tariff Item 90.21 but in the matter of imposition of countervailing duty the Tribunal has taken recourse to Tariff Item 85.18 of the Central Excise Tariff. Mr.Dayan Krishnan, learned counsel for the appellant, in support of the appeal strongly contended that the same goods cannot be classified under two different heads, one for the ordinary rate of duty in terms of the Act and another for the countervailing duty and the Tribunal has committed a grave error of law in so attributing to the applicability of Tariff Item 85.18 of the Central Excise Tariff. We do find some substance in such contention.;