( 1 ) THIS appeal is against the decision of the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal dated 29-3-1993. ( 2 ) THE appellants are manufacturers of micro film reader printer (for short "mfrp" ). It is an admitted position that MFRP would fall under Item 33-D which reads as follows: item 33-D Office machines and apparatus item No. Description of goods rate of duty 33-D. Office machines and apparatus, including typewriters, calculating machines, cash registers, cheque-writing machines, accounting machines, statistical machines, intercom devices (but excluding telephones), teleprinters and auxiliary machines for use with such machines, whether in assembled or unassembled condition, not elsewhere specified. Twenty per cent ad valorem. Explanation. The term office machines and apparatus shall be construed so as to include all machines and apparatus used in offices, shops, factories, workshops, educational institutions, railway stations, hotels and restaurants for doing office work, for data processing and for transmission and reception of messages. ( 3 ) BY Notification No. 51/70-CE dated 1-3-1970 as amended by notifications No. 129/71-CE dated 3-7-1971 and No. 49/76-CE dated 16-3- 1976, exemption from whole of the duty was given to office machines and apparatus falling under Item 33-D provided they were other than those specified in the Schedule. The Schedule reads as follows:"the SCHEDULE 1. Typewriters including those incorporating calculating device. 2. Cheque-writing machines. 3. Teleprinters. 4. Calculating machines. 5. Accounting machines. 6. Cash-registering machines (whether known as cash registers or by any other name ). 7. Postage-franking machines. 8. Automatic vending machines including ticket-issuing machines. 9. Totalisers. 10. Statistical machines including sorting and tabulating machines. 11. Punching machines. 12. Checking machines. 13. Reproducing machines. 14. Interpreting machines. 15. Hectograph or stencil-duplicating machines. 16. Addressing machines. 17. Coin-sorting machines. 18, Coin-counting machines. 18-A. Coin-wrapping machines. 19. Perforating machines. 19-A. Stapling machines. 20. Letter-folding machines. 21. Letter-opening machines. 21-A. Letter-closing or -sealing machines. 22. Stamp-cancelling machines. 23. Machines for delivering wrapping paper or gummed tape. 24. Machines for moistening gummed paper or stamps. 25. . Paper-shredders of a kind used for destroying confidential waste. 26. Dictating machines. 27. Intercom devices. 28. Photocopying machines. 29. Time-recording machines. 29~a. Attendance machines. 30. Data-processing machines other than computers (including central processing units and peripheral devices ). 31. Electronic stencil scanners. Explanation. 24. Machines for moistening gummed paper or stamps. 25. . Paper-shredders of a kind used for destroying confidential waste. 26. Dictating machines. 27. Intercom devices. 28. Photocopying machines. 29. Time-recording machines. 29~a. Attendance machines. 30. Data-processing machines other than computers (including central processing units and peripheral devices ). 31. Electronic stencil scanners. Explanation. In the Schedule to this notification, office machine or apparatus includes an office machine or apparatus which may, in addition to its own function, be used for performing the functions of two or more machines or apparatus specified therein. " ( 4 ) THE appellants claimed exemption under this notification for their mfrp. This exemption was denied to them by the Assistant Collector on the ground that they fell under Item 13 i. e. a reproducing machine. In appeal the collector of Central Excise, by his order dated 31-5-1990, allowed the claim of the appellants. The respondent then filed an appeal before the Customs, excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal which by the impugned order has disallowed the claim. It has been held that MFRP is a reproducing machine as well as a photocopying machine. ( 5 ) WE have heard the parties. It is an admitted position that the machine of the appellants reads what is stored on a microfilm and can also print out what has been stored on a microfilm in the same condition as if the print were an original. We are in agreement with the finding that such a machine is a reproducing machine. It being a reproducing machine, the appellants are not entitled to the benefit of the notification. ( 6 ) WE, therefore, see no infirmity in the impugned judgment. The appeal is dismissed accordingly. There will be no order as to costs.