2002 (7) TMI 310 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues: Classification of goods under Chapter sub-heading 9401.00 or 9404.00

Detailed Analysis:

Issue 1: Classification of Goods
The case involved a dispute over the correct classification of P.U. Foam Block products manufactured by the respondents. The Departmental authorities contended that the goods should be classified under Chapter sub-heading 9404.00 instead of 9401.00, leading to a difference in the applicable duty rate. The respondents argued that the goods, being a combination of mattress and cushion, should be classified under sub-heading 9401.00.

Issue 2: Judicial Review of Commissioner's Decision
The Commissioner (Appeals) had previously ruled in favor of the respondents, holding that the goods were rightly classifiable under Chapter sub-heading 9401.00. The Appellate Tribunal reviewed the Commissioner's decision and examined a similar case where the classification under 9401.00 had been upheld. The Tribunal noted the detailed analysis conducted by the Commissioner in the previous case, emphasizing the specific nature of heading 94.01 for seats convertible into beds.

Issue 3: Interpretation of Tariff Schedule
In its analysis, the Tribunal referred to relevant provisions such as Note 2 to Chapter 94, which specifies that items in heading 94.01 must be designed for placement on the floor or ground. The Tribunal also highlighted the importance of using the most specific description for classification, as per Rule 3(a) of the Rules for interpretation of the tariff schedule. The Tribunal considered the HSN explanatory notes and trade understanding of the goods in question to support its decision.

Conclusion:
After a thorough examination of the evidence and legal provisions, the Appellate Tribunal upheld the classification of the goods under sub-heading No. 9401.00, in line with the earlier decision and for the sake of uniformity. The Tribunal rejected the appeals filed by the Revenue, affirming the classification under Chapter sub-heading 9401.00.