ORDER 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. We find no reason to depart from the finding of fact recorded by the authorities which commended to the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal that the machines in question undisputedly were declared as "M/C for use in leather footwear industries injection moulding of PVC/TPR/EVA soles with STD ACC Model global 138/150", therefore, not covered under Heading 8453 of the Customs Tariff (i.e. machinery for preparing, tanning or working hides, skins or leather or for making or repairing footwear or other articles of hides, skins or leather, other than sewing machines). 3. The fact that the notification dated 23 rd March, 2010 refers to exemption from the levy of anti-dumping duty imposed on machinery used for making footwear and footwear sole/strap/heel will be of no avail to the appellant as the said machine should necessarily fall under classification No.8453, which in the present case is not exclusively used for the purpose so specified under that category. 4. The argument of the appellant that the entry 8453 refers independently to 'Machinery for making or repairing footwear', cannot be countenanced. For, that expression will have to be understood in the context of the heading dealing with 'Machinery for preparing, tanning or working hides, skins or leather'. 5. The fact that in some other case benefit has been given to the importer on the basis of clamping force being less than 40 tons, also, will be of no avail to the appellant as that contention was not specifically taken by the appellant before the authorities concerned, being question of fact. 6. Hence, this appeal fails and the same is dismissed.