{"id":57017,"date":"2004-12-07T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2004-12-06T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-customs-bangalore-vs-maestro-motors-ltd-and-anr-on-7-december-2004"},"modified":"2015-11-06T12:37:20","modified_gmt":"2015-11-06T07:07:20","slug":"collector-of-customs-bangalore-vs-maestro-motors-ltd-and-anr-on-7-december-2004","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-customs-bangalore-vs-maestro-motors-ltd-and-anr-on-7-december-2004","title":{"rendered":"Collector Of Customs, Bangalore vs Maestro Motors Ltd. And Anr on 7 December, 2004"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
Collector Of Customs, Bangalore vs Maestro Motors Ltd. And Anr on 7 December, 2004<\/div>\n
Bench: S.N. Varfava, Dr. Ar. Lakshmanan<\/div>\n
           CASE NO.:\nAppeal (civil)  3532-3560 of 1997\n\nPETITIONER:\nCOLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, BANGALORE\n\nRESPONDENT:\nMAESTRO MOTORS LTD. AND ANR.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT: 07\/12\/2004\n\nBENCH:\nS.N. VARFAVA & DR. AR. LAKSHMANAN\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
JUDGMENT<\/p>\n
2004 Supp(6) SCR 745<\/p>\n
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by<\/p>\n
S.N. VARIAVA, J. : These Appeals are against the Judgment of the Customs
\nExcise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (for short CEGAT) dated 10th
\nSeptemner, 1996. This Judgment is in respect of two companies, namely, M\/s.
\nMaruti Udyog Ltd. and M\/s. Maestro Motors Ltd. (earlier known as M\/s.
\nSipani Automobiles Limited). Both these Companies are manufacturers of
\nmotor cars. Apart from this common fact, the other facts are not identical.
\nEven though CEGAT has disposed of the Appeals by a common Order, the cases
\nof these two parties would have to be dealt with separately by this Court.\n<\/p>\n
First, the case of M\/s, Maruti Udyog Ltd. is being considered.\n<\/p>\n
On 23rd April, 1982 M\/s. Maruti Udyog Ltd. applied for grant of and
\nIndustrial Licence for manufacturing passenger cars and light duty utility
\nvehicles. They also entered into joint venture agreement and collaboration
\nwith M\/s. Suzuki Motors Company Ltd. M\/s. Maruti Udyog Ltd. imported from
\nM\/s. Suzuki Motors Company Ltd. two shipments i.e. 24 CKD packs (completely
\nknocked down condition) and 48 CKD packs respectively of passenger car
\ncomponents. They filed two Bills of Entry bearing Nos. 118\/ 345 and
\n1412\/261 for clearing the goods which were claimed to be components of
\nmotor vehicles under Tariff Heading 8704 of the Customs Tariff. They also
\nclaimed benefit of Notification Nos. 29\/83 and 29A\/83. By two Orders dated
\n9th September, 1983 and 30th September, 1983, the Adjudicating Authority
\nheld that the imported components being complete cars in CKD packs had the
\nessential character of the finished product and as such the consignments
\nwere to be treated as motor cars and not components. It was held that M\/’s.
\nMaruti Udyog Ltd. was not entitled to the benefit of Notifications as the
\nNotifications were only for components. It was further held that in any
\ncase M\/s. Maruti Ugyog Ltd. had not complied with the conditions of the
\nNotifications.\n<\/p>\n
In the Appeal filed by M\/s. Maruti Udyog Ltd., the Commissioner (Appeals)
\nby an order dated 30th April, 1985 held that the goods were component parts
\nand not motor cars. It was also held that the Company was entitled to the
\nbenefit of Notification No. 29\/83.\n<\/p>\n
CEGAT has, by a 2 to 1 Judgment, held that both the Companies are entitled
\nto benefit of the Notifications.\n<\/p>\n
The questions for consideration by this Court was whether the CKD packs
\nimported into country could be considered to be motor cars and not
\ncomponents and secondly, whether M\/s. Maruti Udyog Ltd. are entitled to the
\nbenefit of Notification No. 29\/83.\n<\/p>\n
The relevant Tariff Items are 87.02 and 87.04, which read as follows :\n<\/p>\n
__________________________________________________________________________
\nHeading\tSub-heading No. and\tStandard\tCentral
\nNo.\tdescription\tRate of duty\tExcise
\n\t\t\tTariff Item.\n<\/p>\n
(1)\t(2)\t(3)\t(4)
\n87.02\tMotor vehicles for the transport\t\t34
\n\tof persons goods or materials
\n\t(including sports motors vehicles
\n\tother than those of Heading
\n\tNo. 87.09\/12) :\n<\/p>\n
\t(1) Not elsewhere specified\t60%
\n750<\/span><\/p>\n
87.04\/06\tChassis fitted with engines,\t\t34, 34A
\n\tbodies (including cabs) and
\n\tparts and accessories of the
\n\tmotor vehicles failing within
\n\tHeading No. 87.01, 87.02
\n\tor 87.03 :\n<\/p>\n
\t(1) Not elsewhere specified\t100%
\n\t(2) Parts designed for the articles\t40%
\n\tcovered by sub-heading No. (1)
\n\tof Heading No. 87.01 and
\n\tsub-heading No. (3) of Heading
\n\tNo. 87.02.\n<\/p>\n
___________________________________________________________________________
\n___________<\/p>\n
In considering which Tariff Item is to apply one has to take note of the
\ngeneral rules of Interpretation of the Harmonized System, Rule 2(a) of
\nwhich reads as follows :\n<\/p>\n
“Rule 2(a): Any reference in a heading to an article shall be taken to
\ninclude a reference to that article incomplete or unfinished, provided
\nthat, as presented, the incomplete or unfinished article has the essential
\ncharacter of the complete or finished article. It shall also be taken to
\ninclude a reference to that article complete or finished (or falling to be
\nclassified as complete or finished by virtue of this rule), presented
\nunassembled or disassembled.”<\/p>\n
Thus, as per this Interpretative Rule, even though an article is incomplete
\nor unfinished when it is presented for clearance, if that article was the
\nessential character of the complete article and\/or even though the complete
\nor finished article is presented in an unassembled or dissembled form the
\nclassification must be as a complete article. In this case, it is fairly
\nnot being denied that the components were imported in a CKD packs. Thus
\nwhat was imported was completely knocked down cars. The components imported
\nhad the essential character of a complete car even though presented in
\nunassembled form. As per interpretative Rule 2(a) even though presented
\nunassembled they have to be classified as a complete article. Thus, for
\npurposes of clearance the components had to be classified as a car under
\nTariff Item 87.02. The finding of the Commissioner (Appeals) to the
\ncontrary is clearly erroneous and requires to be and is hereby set aside.
\nThe question then arises as to whether M\/s. Maruti Udyog Ltd. is entitled
\nto benefit of Notification No. 29\/93. The said Notification read as follows
\n:\n<\/p>\n
“In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-Section (1) of Section 25 of
\nthe Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962), the Central Government, being satisfied
\nthat it is necessary in the public interest to hereby exempt components
\n(including components of fuel-efficient motor cars in semi-knocked down
\npacks and completely knocked down packs) required for the manufacture of
\nfuel-efficient motor car of engine capacity not exceeding 1000 cubic
\ncentimeters from :\n<\/p>\n
(a)    So much of the duty of customs which is leviable thereon under the
\nFirst Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (51 of 1975), as is in
\nexcess of the amount calculate at the rate of 25% ad-veloram; and<\/p>\n
(b)    the whole of the additional duty leviable thereon under Section 3 of
\nthe said Customs, Tariff Act.\n<\/p>\n
Subject to the following conditions, namely :\n<\/p>\n
(i) the exemption contained herein shall be applicable only to those
\ncomponents (including components of fuel-efficient cars in semi-knocked
\ndown packs and completely knocked down packs) which are covered by lists
\ncertified by an officer not below the rank of an industrial Advisor or
\nAdditional Industrial Adviser in the Directorate General of Technical
\nDevelopment and an Officer not below the rank of a Joint Secretary in the
\nMinistry of Industry (Development of Heavy Industry) to be required for the
\nmanufacture of fuel efficient motor cars to engine capacity not exceeding
\n1000 cubic centimeters;\n<\/p>\n
(ii) the importer products evidence to the Assistant Collector or Customs
\nto the effect that the said components (including components or fuel-
\nefficient motor cars in semi-knocked down packs and completely knocked down
\npacks) have been imported by such importer under a programme duty approved
\nby the Ministry of Industry (Development of Heavy Industry) and the
\nIndustrial Adviser or the Additional Industrial Adviser of the Directorate
\nGeneral of Technical Development in the Ministry of Industry for the
\nmanufacture of fuel efficient motor cars of engine capacity not exceeding
\n1000 cubic centimeters; and<\/p>\n
(iii) the imported shall, within such period as the Asstt Collector of
\nCustoms may specify in this behalf, produce a certificate from the Asstt.
\nCollector of Central Excise in whose jurisdiction the factory manufacturing
\nsuch fuel-efficient motor cars is situated to the effect that such imported
\ncomponents (including components of fuel-efficient motor cars in semi-
\nknocked down packs and completely knocked down packs) have been used in the
\nmanufacture of fuel-efficient motor cars of engine capacity not exceeding
\n1000 cubic centimeters.\n<\/p>\n
Explanation : For the purpose of this notification, “fuel efficient motor
\ncar” in respect of a motor car of engine capacity not exceeding 1000 cubic
\ncentimeters means a motor car which is certified to run not less than 20
\nkilometers per liter of petrol by an officer not below the rank of a Joint
\nSecretary in the Ministry of Industry (Development of Heavy Industry) on
\nthe basis of the tests (hereinafter referred to the fuel-efficiently test)
\ncarried out by the vehicle Research Development Establishment of the
\nMinistry of Defence, Ahmednagar (Maharashtra) or the Automotive Research
\nAssociation of India, Pune (Maharashtra), having regard to the following,
\nnamely :\n<\/p>\n
(a)    the fuel-efficiency test shall be conducted with a pay load of 300
\nkilograms;\n<\/p>\n
(b)    the fuel-efficiency test shall be conducted using petrol having an
\noctone level not exceeding 87; and<\/p>\n
(c) the fuel-efficiency test shall be carried out on a selected level test
\ntrack at a steady speed of 50 kilometers per hour for a minimum stretch of
\none kilometer and the average of 20 runs, comprising of 10 runs in each
\ndirection shall be taken for carrying out the test and the test figures
\nshall be corrected to sea level and to + 25% C ambient temperature.\n<\/p>\n
2. This Notification shall be in force upto an inclusive of the 24th day of
\nFebruary 1988.”\n<\/p>\n
It is settled law that to avail he benefit of a notification a party must
\ncomply with all the conditions of the Notification. Further, a Notification
\nhas to be interpreted in terms of its language. If in the Notification
\nexemption is granted with reference to tariff items in the First Schedule
\nto the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, then the same rules of interpretation must
\napply. In that case the goods will be classified, even for the purposes of
\nthe Notification, as they are classified for purposes of payment of customs
\nduty. But where the language is plain and clear effect must be given to it.
\nIn this Notification what is exempted is components, including components
\nof fuel efficient motor cars in semi-knocked down packs and completely
\nknocked down packs. Undoubtedly, for purposes of levy of custom duty, by
\nvirtue of Interpretative Rule 2(a), the components in a completely knocked
\ndown pack would be considered to be cars. But in view of the clear language
\nof the Notification the components including components in completely
\nknocked down packs are exempted. Effect must be given to the wording of the
\nNotification. Thus components in completely knocked down packs would get
\nthe exemption under this Notification, even though for purposes of
\nclassification they may be considered to be cars.\n<\/p>\n
It was however urged that even though these components were covered by the
\nNotification M\/s. Maruti Udyog Ltd. would not be complied with the
\nconditions of the Notification, it was submitted that they had not
\nsubmitted the certificates required under sub-clauses b(i) and b(ii) of the
\nsaid Notification. This was disputed by counsel on behalf of M\/s. Maruti
\nMotors Ltd. We find that the Adjudicating Authority has categorically held
\nthat these certificates were not produced. On the other hand, the
\nCommissioner (Appeals) and CEGAT have held that the certificates produced
\nwere sufficient. Unfortunately, neither side has shown to us what were the
\ncertificates which were to be produced before the Adjudicating Authority.
\nIn the absence of those certificates we cannot decide whether or not the
\nconditions imposed by Sub-clauses b(i) and b(iii) have been fulfilled. It
\nwill therefore be necessary to remit the matter back to CEGAT for
\nreconsideration of this aspect after clarifying what is required.\n<\/p>\n
It is clear that under Sub-clauses b(i) of the said Notification the
\ncomponents imported must be those which are covered by lists certified by
\nan Officer not below the rank of an industrial Advisor or Additional
\nIndustrial Adviser in the Directorate General to Technical Development and
\nan Officer not below the rank of an Joint Secretary in the Ministry of
\nIndustry (Development of Heavy Industry). Such a list must show that the
\ncomponents are required for manufacturing of fuel efficient motor cars of
\nengines capacity not exceeding 1000 cubic centimeters. A mere certificate
\nthat the components are required for manufacture of motor vehicle or that
\nM\/s. Maruti Udyog Ltd. has been licenced to manufacture such motor vehicles
\nwould not be sufficient. What would have to be ascertained by CEGAT is
\nwhether any lists, as per Sub-clause b(i) had been produced before the
\nAdjudicating Authority and whether the components are as per that list.\n<\/p>\n
Under Sub-clause b(iii) of the Notification, a certificate of fuel
\nefficiency of same type of car or a prototype would not be sufficient. What
\nwould be required is a certificate from the Assistant Collector of Central
\nExcise, in whose jurisdiction the factory is situated, to the effect that
\nthe components imported (in completely knocked down packs) had been
\nactually used in the manufacture of fuel efficient motor cars of an engine
\ncapacity not exceeding 1000 cubic centimeters. The fuel-efficiency
\nCertificate has to be issued in respect of a car after carrying out the
\ntest set out in the Explanation to Sub-clause b(iii). Of course such a test
\nneed not be of each and every car manufactured from the components. A test
\nof a prototype or a single car would be sufficient. But the certificate
\nmust show that the components were actually used in manufacture of fuel
\nefficient motor cars of engine capacity not exceeding 1000 cubic
\ncentimeters.\n<\/p>\n
With these clarifications we remit the matter of M\/s. Maruti Udyog Ltd.
\nback to CEGAT for deciding whether the required certificates were produced.
\nIt is clarified that these certificates should have been produced before
\nthe Adjudicating Authority. It would not be open for the CEGAT to allow
\nM\/s. Maruti Udyog Ltd. to produce any new or other certificate which had
\nnot already been produced before the Adjudicating Authority. If the
\ncertificates as required are available, then M\/s. Maruti Udyog Ltd. will be
\nentitled to the benefit of the Notification No. 29\/83. If the certificates
\nas required are not available then M\/s. Maruti Udyog Ltd. will undoubtedly
\nnot be entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 29\/93. In that event for
\npurposes of payment of custom duty the components will have to be
\nclassified as a car and duty will have to be paid under Tariff  Item 82.02.\n<\/p>\n
Before parting we must take note of one further aspect. It was submitted
\nthat for the subsequent imports the Department has granted the benefit of
\nthe Notification and allowed clearance of the components in CKD packs by
\ngranting benefit of the Notification. It was submitted that this also
\nshowed that M\/s. Maruti Udyog Ltd. is entitled to be benefit of the
\nNotification. We cannot accept such a submission. Those clearances may be
\nbecause the conditions of the Notification were fulfilled in respect of
\nthose imports. Thus, merely because in those cases clearances have been
\nallowed by itself cannot be a ground for allowing benefit of the
\nNotification in this case.\n<\/p>\n
That now brings us to the case of M\/s. Maestro Motors Ltd. On 17th
\nNovember, 1993 and 5th May, 1992, M\/s. Sipani Automobiles Limited (as it
\nthen was) entered into collaboration with M\/s. Rover U.K. for manufacture
\nof Montego cars. They imported 217 sets of cars considering of body
\nassembly (complete with accessories), with gear, engine assembly etc. and
\nalso components such as wind screen assembly, wheel rims, glass assembly,
\nradiator assembly, front and back suspension, fuel tank assembly etc. In
\neffect they were importing the entire car in completely knocked down
\ncondition. M\/s. Sipani imported all these items by filing 11 Bills of
\nEntries with the Bom bay Customs and the rest 14 Bills of Entries with the
\nMadras Custom. They claimed the goods to be components and also claimed
\nbenefit of Notification No. 72\/93.\n<\/p>\n
The Adjudicating Authority held that between the imports in Bombay and
\nMadras entire cars had been imported, in completely knocked down condition.
\nThe components were thus classified as cars. It was also held that the
\nCompany was not entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 72\/93 as that
\nNotification only gave benefit to parts and components. CEGAT has by the
\nimpugned majority Judgment allowed the Appeal even of M\/s. Maestro Motors
\nLtd. It is held that M\/s. Maestro Motors Ltd. are entitled to the benefit
\nof Notification No. 72\/93.\n<\/p>\n
We have, whilst dealing with the case of M\/s. Maruti Udyog Ltd., set out
\nhow for the purposes of payment of custom duty such goods are to be
\nclassified. As stated above, such components are nothing but cars in
\nknocked down condition. Applying Interpretative Rule 2(a) such components
\nare to be classified a cars.\n<\/p>\n
The question then arises as to whether M\/s. Maestro Motors Ltd. is entitled
\nto the benefit to Notification No. 72\/93. As has been stated hereinabove,
\nwhilst dealing with the case of M\/s. Maruti Udyog Ltd., a Notification has
\nto be interpreted in accordance with the language used in the Notification.
\nWhere the language is clear and unambiguous an interpretation which does
\nnot tally with the language cannot be given. Notification No. 72\/93 reads
\nas follows :\n<\/p>\n
“In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of the Customs Act,
\n1962 (52 of 1962), the Central Government, being satisfied that it is
\nnecessary in the public interest so to do, hereby exempts components and
\nparts of motor vehicles falling within Chapter 87 of the First Schedule to
\nthe Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (51 of 1975) and goods specified in column (3)
\nof the Table hereto annexed and falling under the heading Nos. of the First
\nSchedule, specified in the corresponding entry in column (2) of the said
\nTable, when imported into India, for the manufacture of motor failing
\nwithin Chapter 87 of the said First Schedule, from :\n<\/p>\n
(a)    so much of the duty of Customs which is leviable thereon under the
\nFirst Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (51 of 1975) as is in excess
\nof the amount calculated at the rate of 50 per cent . Ad valorem; and<\/p>\n
(b)    the whole of the additional duty leviable thereon under section 3 of
\nthe said Customs Tariff Act, subject to the following conditions, namely :\n<\/p>\n
(i)    the exemption contained herein shall be applicable only to those
\ngoods which are required for the manufacture of motor vehicle:\n<\/p>\n
(ii) that the importer shall, within such period as the Assistant Collector
\nof Customs may specify in this behalf, produce a certificate from the
\nAssistant Collector of Central Excise in whose jurisdiction the factory
\nmanufacturing motor vehicles using the goods imported under this
\nnotification is situated to the effect that the said imported goods have
\nbeen used in the manufacture of motor vehicles; and<\/p>\n
(iii) the imported furnishes an undertaking to the effect that :\n<\/p>\n
(a)     the said goods shall be used for the purpose specified above;\n<\/p>\n
(b)    an account of the said goods received and consumed in the place of
\nmanufacture for the aforesaid purpose shall be maintained in the manner
\nspecified by the Assistant Collector of Customs;\n<\/p>\n
(c)     he shall produce the extract of such account duly certified by the
\njurisdiction Assistant Collector of Central Excise evidencing receipt of
\nthe said goods in the premises of the place of manufacture and the use
\nthereof for manufacture of motor vehicles within a period of three motor
\nvehicle within a period of three months or such extended period as the
\nAssistant Collector of Customs may allow; and<\/p>\n
(d)    he shall pay, on demand, in the event of his failure to comply with\n<\/p>\n
(a), (b) or (c) above an amount equal to the difference between the duty
\nleviable on such quantity of the said imported goods but for the exemption
\ncontained herein and that already paid at the time of the importation.\n<\/p>\n
___________________________________________________________________________
\n_____________<\/p>\n
 S. No.\t Heading        Description of Goods<\/p>\n
(I)\t(2)\t(3)\n<\/p>\n
1.\t40.09\tBrake hoses\/radiator hoses with or without fittings.\n<\/p>\n
2.\t40.10\tV-Belts\n<\/p>\n
3.\t40.11\tTyres\n<\/p>\n
4.\t40.13\tTubes\n<\/p>\n
5.\t40.16\tWeather strips, oil seals\n<\/p>\n
6.\t70.07\tSafety glass\n<\/p>\n
7.\t70.09\tRear-view mirrors\n<\/p>\n
8.\t73.18\tScrews, bolts, nuts and washers\n<\/p>\n
9.\t73.20\tLeaf springs and helical springs\n<\/p>\n
10.\t8301\tLocks\n<\/p>\n
11.\t84.07\tSpark ignition reciprocating internal combustion piston
\nengines (Petrol Engines).\n<\/p>\n
12.\t84.08\tCompressor Ignition internal combustion piston engines
\n(Diesel Engines)\n<\/p>\n
13.\t84.09\tParts of engines covered under heading No. 84.07 and 84.08\n<\/p>\n
14.\t84.13\tFuel, lubricating or cooling medium pumps for internal
\ncombustion piston engines\n<\/p>\n
15.\t84.14\tTurbocharger\n<\/p>\n
16.\t84.82\tBall or roller bearings.\n<\/p>\n
17.\t84.83\tCrankshaft, plain shaft bearings, gears, fly wheels,
\nclutches, universal joints.\n<\/p>\n
18.\t84.84\tGaskets\n<\/p>\n
19.
\n85.11
\nSpark plugs, fly-wheel magneto, distributor, ignition coil, starter motor
\ngenerator (altermator) and cut outs.\n<\/p>\n
20.
\n85.12
\n___________________________________________________________________________
\n________________<\/p>\n
Wind screen wipres, head lights and indicator lights<\/p>\n
Thus, under this Notification what is exempted are components and parts
\nfalling within Chapter 87 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act,
\n1975 and goods specified in Column 3 of the Table. Thus in this
\nNotification, unlike as in Notification No. 29\/93, components in CKD packs
\nthe not exempted. Under this Notification it is only components and parts
\nwhich fall within Chapter 87 are exempted. The wording is very clear. For a
\ncomponent and part to be exempted it must be a component or part within
\nChapter 87 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. If, by
\nvirtue of interpretative Rules, for purposes of the First Schedule to the
\nCustoms Tariff Act, 1975 the imported goods are not considered to be
\ncomponents and parts, then for purposes of this Notification also they
\ncannot be said to be components and parts. In our view, CEGAT has erred in
\nholding that the interpretative Rule 2(a) does not apply to a Notification.
\nWhen a Notification exempts goods falling within the First Schedule to the
\nCustoms Tariff Act, 1975, then the goods must be classified in the same
\nmanner both for purposes of payment of customs duty as well as for purposes
\nof exemption\/ benefit under that Notification. However if the wording of
\nthe Notification show that an item is specifically exempted then the
\nexemption will apply to that item even though for purposes of
\nclassification it may be considered to be something else. To take this very
\ncase as in illustration, where like in Notification No. 29\/83 components
\nincluding components in CKD packs, were given benefit of exemption those
\ncomponents would get exemption even though for purposes of payment of duty
\nthey are classified as cars. But where, as in this case, components and
\nparts failing within Chapter 87 are exempted, then the components and parts
\nmust be considered to be components and parts for purposes, not just for
\nexemption but also payment of custom duty. If for purposes of payment of
\ncustom duty they are not deemed to be components and parts, then they are
\nalso not components and parts for purposes of the Notification. In other
\nwords when, in a Notification, the exemption is with reference to an item
\nin the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, then the
\ninterpretative Rules would equally apply to such Notification. In such
\ncases, if they are not components and parts for the purposes of payment of
\ncustom duty they would not be components and parts even for the purposes of
\nthe Notification. Thus, M\/s. Maestro Motors Ltd. are not entitled to the
\nbenefit of Notification No. 72\/93.\n<\/p>\n
It was however urged that this Notification exempts 20 components and
\nparts. It was submitted that M\/s. Maestro Motors Ltd. must be given benefit
\nof those 20 components and parts. We are unable to accept this submission.
\nThese 20 components and parts would get exemption only provided they were
\nimported as components and parts. If they are imported as components and
\nparts in CKD pack, then the pack as a whole is a car by virtue of the
\ninterpretative rule. In such a case even these components would not be
\nentitled to exemption.\n<\/p>\n
Under these circumstances, the Order of CEGAT in respect of M\/s Maestro
\nMotors Ltd. cannot be sustained and is hereby set aside. The Order of the
\nAdjudicating Authority is restored.\n<\/p>\n
These Appeals stand disposed of accordingly. There will be no order as to
\ncosts.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India Collector Of Customs, Bangalore vs Maestro Motors Ltd. And Anr on 7 December, 2004 Bench: S.N. Varfava, Dr. Ar. Lakshmanan CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 3532-3560 of 1997 PETITIONER: COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, BANGALORE RESPONDENT: MAESTRO MOTORS LTD. AND ANR. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 07\/12\/2004 BENCH: S.N. VARFAVA & DR. AR. LAKSHMANAN JUDGMENT: JUDGMENT […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-57017","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nCollector Of Customs, Bangalore vs Maestro Motors Ltd. And Anr on 7 December, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-customs-bangalore-vs-maestro-motors-ltd-and-anr-on-7-december-2004\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Collector Of Customs, Bangalore vs Maestro Motors Ltd. And Anr on 7 December, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-customs-bangalore-vs-maestro-motors-ltd-and-anr-on-7-december-2004\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2004-12-06T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-11-06T07:07:20+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"19 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/collector-of-customs-bangalore-vs-maestro-motors-ltd-and-anr-on-7-december-2004#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/collector-of-customs-bangalore-vs-maestro-motors-ltd-and-anr-on-7-december-2004\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Collector Of Customs, Bangalore vs Maestro Motors Ltd. And Anr on 7 December, 2004\",\"datePublished\":\"2004-12-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-11-06T07:07:20+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/collector-of-customs-bangalore-vs-maestro-motors-ltd-and-anr-on-7-december-2004\"},\"wordCount\":3832,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/collector-of-customs-bangalore-vs-maestro-motors-ltd-and-anr-on-7-december-2004#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/collector-of-customs-bangalore-vs-maestro-motors-ltd-and-anr-on-7-december-2004\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/collector-of-customs-bangalore-vs-maestro-motors-ltd-and-anr-on-7-december-2004\",\"name\":\"Collector Of Customs, Bangalore vs Maestro Motors Ltd. And Anr on 7 December, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2004-12-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-11-06T07:07:20+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/collector-of-customs-bangalore-vs-maestro-motors-ltd-and-anr-on-7-december-2004#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/collector-of-customs-bangalore-vs-maestro-motors-ltd-and-anr-on-7-december-2004\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/collector-of-customs-bangalore-vs-maestro-motors-ltd-and-anr-on-7-december-2004#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Collector Of Customs, Bangalore vs Maestro Motors Ltd. And Anr on 7 December, 2004\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Collector Of Customs, Bangalore vs Maestro Motors Ltd. And Anr on 7 December, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-customs-bangalore-vs-maestro-motors-ltd-and-anr-on-7-december-2004","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Collector Of Customs, Bangalore vs Maestro Motors Ltd. And Anr on 7 December, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-customs-bangalore-vs-maestro-motors-ltd-and-anr-on-7-december-2004","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2004-12-06T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-11-06T07:07:20+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"19 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-customs-bangalore-vs-maestro-motors-ltd-and-anr-on-7-december-2004#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-customs-bangalore-vs-maestro-motors-ltd-and-anr-on-7-december-2004"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Collector Of Customs, Bangalore vs Maestro Motors Ltd. And Anr on 7 December, 2004","datePublished":"2004-12-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-11-06T07:07:20+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-customs-bangalore-vs-maestro-motors-ltd-and-anr-on-7-december-2004"},"wordCount":3832,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-customs-bangalore-vs-maestro-motors-ltd-and-anr-on-7-december-2004#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-customs-bangalore-vs-maestro-motors-ltd-and-anr-on-7-december-2004","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-customs-bangalore-vs-maestro-motors-ltd-and-anr-on-7-december-2004","name":"Collector Of Customs, Bangalore vs Maestro Motors Ltd. And Anr on 7 December, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2004-12-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-11-06T07:07:20+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-customs-bangalore-vs-maestro-motors-ltd-and-anr-on-7-december-2004#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-customs-bangalore-vs-maestro-motors-ltd-and-anr-on-7-december-2004"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-customs-bangalore-vs-maestro-motors-ltd-and-anr-on-7-december-2004#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Collector Of Customs, Bangalore vs Maestro Motors Ltd. And Anr on 7 December, 2004"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/57017","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=57017"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/57017\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=57017"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=57017"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=57017"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}