JUDGMENT: MR. MUHAMMAD ASLAM, TECHNICAL MEMBER.--1. This appeal has been filed against order- inappeal No, 312 of 1993 dated 23.10.1993 passed by Member (Judicial), Central Board of Revenue.
2. The case of the Department is that the tyres of specifications 23.1-26/10 PR(TT) and 28L-26/12PR
(TT) ' imported by the appellants vide Bill of Entry No, 42768 dated 23.11.1991 are designed essentially for use with vibratory road-rollers, earth moving machines, combine harvesters and log skidders and not exclusively for gricultural tractors plying in Pakistan. They are, therefore, not entitled to the concession envisaged under SRO 505(1)/88 dated 26.6.1988 read with SRO 500(1)/88 dated 26.6.1988.
3. The stand of the appellants is that these tyres being useable with agricultural. tractors are automatically entitled to duty and tax-free concession in accordance with law. The observation of the Department that these tyres cannot be mounted on any agricultural tractors plying in Pakistan is not only patently wrong but even otherwise not relevant for the purpose of deciding the issue of applicability of concession. In this respect, their thrust is on TRA Code (R2) which is moulded on the inner walls of the tyres and other features, such as Special Sure Grip, TD 8 Type and Special Deeper lug tyre specially designed to provide extra traction in soft soil conditions. The appellants agitate that this time they have been un-necessarily put to harassment by way of charging custom duty at 90% and sales tax of 10% while in the past during the year 1989, the same tyres were treated as agricultural tractor tyres and released as such by extending the benefit of the SRO.
4. The Tribunal feels that the version of the Department which was upheld at the original as. well as the appellate levels is more convincing, logical, well-founded and well-substantiated. It is a settled principle of law that concession is to be accorded after strictly weighing all pros and cons and not in a hap-hazard manner. In the instant case, the conession has rightly been denied because the Department has established beyond doubt that the subject tyres cannot be mounted on any type of agricultural tractors which are plying in Pakistan. The contention of the appellants that this aspect is not relevant for deciding the issue of applicability of concession is not only improper but also runs contrary to the express provisions of law contained in section 79 of the Customs Act, 1969 which speaks of the element of home consumption of the goods for when a bill of entry is presented. The scheme of things envisaged in all relevant Acts in particular the Customs Act, 1969, is that the imported stuff is to be used in Pakistan in one way or the other. There is no such thing as "importing goods just for the fun of it". Further to that, the Departments has placed on record technical' data in the form of Hand Book 1987 of Tyre and Rim Association (TRA), Sumitomo Tyre Catalogue and Bridgeston Tyre Catalogue to prove that the-subject tyres are essentially useable with log-skidders, earth-moving machines, Vibratory road-rollers and combine harvesters etc. and has also convincingly contradicted the version of the appellants that the TRA Code (R-2) denotes use of these tyres with agricultural tractors.
5. Up-shot of the afore-said discussion is that the stand of the appellants is too illogical and lop- sided to merit any consideration. The Tribunal is, therefore, pleased to confirm the. orders passed in this respect by the lower Forum.
6. The appeal fails being devoid of any merit, substance of legal force.