M/S. HMT LTD . versus COMMNR. CENTRAL EXCISE & CUSTOMS, AURANGABAD

Citation: [2007] 8 S.C.R. 343 · Decided: 13-07-2007 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ARIJIT PASAYAT · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

' , 
MIS. HMT LTD . 
A 
• 
~ 
v. 
COMMNR. CENTRAL EXCISE & CUSTOMS, AURANGABAD 
JULY 13, 2007 
[DR. ARIJIT PASAYA T AND T ARUN CHATTERJEE, JJ.] 
B 
lo, 
Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985-Chap:2r heading 84.34 and H$N 
Explanatory Note to the heading-Machines used for industry of milk and 
milk products-Machines in the· nature of pasteurizer/chiller etc.-Excluded c 
from the heading-Propriety of-Held: In view of the chapter heading and 
HSN Explanatory Note to the heading, machines for processing milk, 
refi·igerating appliances and machines for wrapping or weighing the products 
are excluded from the chapter heading-Central Excise Act, 1944-s. 11 A.1-
Central Excise Rules, 1944-r. 17 3 Q. 
D 
... 
Assessee-manufacturer classified the machines i.e. Skid mounting type 
milk/cream pasteurizer S.H., chilling plant; Milk/Cream chillers, Milk/ 
Cream Pasteurizer, Milk/cream/ghee pumps, Milk and cream separators; 
Butter Packing Machine and parts of the above machines under Chapter 84.34 
of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The autho.rities applied Note 2 of Chapter 
E 
heading 84 and HSN Explanatory Note excluding such items which were in 
the nature of pasteurizer/chiller from the coverage under Chapter Heading 
84.34. Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CEST A 1) found 
that as per HSN Explanatory Note to Chapter heading 84.34, the machines 
for processing milk depend on the principle of heat exchange and are excluded 
''-' 
from coverage under Chapter heading 84.34 and the heading also excludes F 
"' 
refrigerating appliance (whether or not specifically designed for cooling or 
keeping milk and milk cooling vats incorporating evaporator of the 
refrigerating unit from Chapter heading 84.34). HSN Explanatory note also 
excluded the machines for wrapping or weighing the product from Chapter' 
heading 84.34. The order of authorities below was upheld. Hence the present 
appeal 
G 
Dismissing the appeal, the Court 
·~ " 
HELD: 1. Heading 84.37 'Milking machines and dairy machinery', 
covers mechanical milking machines, and other machinery, whether for farm 
343 
H 
344 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(2007) 8 S.C.R. 
A or industrial purposes, used in the treatment of milk or for covering it into 
other dairy products. The majority of machines for processing milk depend 
essentially on the principle of heat exchange and are therefore excluded 
(heading 84.19). The heading further excludes: (a) Refrigerating appliances 
(whether or not specially designed for cooling or keeping milk) and milk-
cooling vats, incorporating an evaporator of a refrigerating unit (heading 
B 84.18) (b) Cream separators, tilter-presses and other filtering or clarifying 
machinery or apparatus (heading 84.21). (c) Machines for washing milk 
containers, and milk bottling or canning machines (heading 84.22). Machines 
which also wrap or weigh the product are excluded from the heading Butter 
Making Machines and Cheese Making Machines (heading 84.22
1and 84.23) 
C and (headings 84.22 and 84.23). (Para 131 (348-A, B, C, D, E, F, GI 
D 
E 
2. Even bare perusal of the Note No. 2 to Chapter heading 84.34 a·n_d 
HSN Explanatory Notes show that the view of the CEST AT is on terra firma. 
The view of the Tribunal in classification matters unless patently wrong should 
not be interfered with. (Para 14) (349-A, BJ 
Commissioner of Central Excise v. V. Carrier Aircraft, (2006) 6 SCALE 
564, reliec! on. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 1176 of2006. 
From the Final Judgment & Order dated 21.10.2005 of the Customs, 
Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribun~I, West Zonal Bench at Mumbai in 
Appeal no. E/1417/00-Mum. 
Ajay Mahithia, Rajesh Kumar and Kailash Chand for the Appellant. 
F 
K. Radhadrishnan, P. Narasimhan and· B. Krishna Prasad for the 
Respondent. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
DR. ARIJIT PASAYA T, J. l. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment 
G of the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, West Regional 
Bench at Mumbai (in short 'CEST AT') which dismissed the appeal filed by the 
appellant. 
2. The backgroynd facts in a nutshell are as under: 
lt 
H 
The assessee is engaged in the manufacturing of machinery and parts 
>-- -I 
\ 
j 
~ 
... 
~ 
~· 
1 
. .--
l 
f:-
I 
~ 
~
t
/, 
-1"4. 
~ 
t:-
>--
t 
l 
~ 
HMT LID., .. COMMNR. CENTRAL EXCISE & CUSTOMS, AURANGABAD [PASAYA T, J .] 345 
thereof falling under Chapter 84 of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (in short the A 
'Tariff Act'). Alleging that the assessee h

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.