ORDER
Shiben K. Dhar, Member (T)
1. This Appeal is directed against the Order-in-Appeal dated 15th June, 1989. The appellants imported a consignment of “Mix Transfer Bar Blank.” They claimed assessment under CTH 8479.90 read with 9806.00 together with Notification 69/87-Cus., dated 1-3-1987 as amended. Customs Authorities, however, assessed these goods under sub-heading 7505.12. Their claim for refund was also rejected by the authorities below.
2. The appellants desire decision on merits.
3. Arguing for the Revenue, the ld. DR submits that they have not given details of post-importation processes to which the goods are subjected. It is only if goods can by straightway fitted as parts of the machine under 8479.90 that these could be covered under CTH 9806. Even though in the Memorandum they have referred to certain post-importation processes like drilling of holes which facilitates the transfer of material which is fed from hoppers but the essential details of such processes have not been given.
4. The appellants claim these blanks to be used as parts of stamper machine. Goods have been imported as blanks only and cannot at that stage be used as parts of stamper machine. The appellants have not substantiated their claim with details of processes which they claim to be only minor processes. Such details in fact are necessary in order to arrive at a finding whether the 26/943 impugned goods can be used as parts with only minor processes or a series of -post-importation processes have to be carried out to enable the impugned goods to function as parts of the machine. There is no catalogue in the appeal papers nor any authentic literature to illustrate the processes to which these goods are subjected to before these are fitted as parts of the stamper machine. In absence of such details, it is difficult to accept the claim of the appellants for assessment under CTH 8479.90 read with sub-heading 9806.00, against the clear description of goods in CTH 7505 which refers to bars, rods and profiles of nickel.
5. In view of this, we reject the appeal and uphold the impugned order.
