2002 (4) TMI 546 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues involved:
Classification of charging and discharging machines for hot strip mill under sub-heading 8455.10 or 8455.90.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Classification under sub-heading 8455.10 or 8455.90
The primary issue in this appeal was the classification of charging and discharging machines for a hot strip mill under sub-heading 8455.10 as claimed by the appellant or under sub-heading 8455.90 as parts of a Metal Rolling Mill as confirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals) under the impugned Order.

Appellant's Argument:
The appellant argued that the machines in question were complete machines and not parts, as they performed various functions such as conveyor for moving slabs, lifting slabs, pushing steel slabs into the furnace, extracting them, and weighing them. Reference was made to various technical aspects and definitions of machines, emphasizing that the goods satisfied the definition of machines as per Note 5 to Section XVI. Previous decisions were cited to support the argument that similar equipment had been classified as complete machines and not parts.

Respondent's Argument:
The respondent contended that the machines were not metal rolling mills themselves and, therefore, could not be classified under sub-heading 8455.10. Reference was made to the Purchase Order placed by the Steel Authority of India Ltd., which specified the machines as charging and discharging machines for a hot strip mill. It was argued that the machines ordered were to be used in rolling mills but did not qualify as rolling mills themselves. Previous decisions were cited to support the argument that equipment could only be classified as parts if solely and principally devised for the said machines.

Judgment:
The Tribunal analyzed the technical write-up provided by the appellant and concluded that the charging and discharging machines did not function as metal rolling mills. It was observed that the machines performed various functions distinct from those of rolling mills, such as conveying, lifting, pushing, extracting, and weighing steel slabs. The Tribunal agreed with the respondent's argument that the machines could not be considered as metal rolling mills and, therefore, could not be classified under sub-heading 8455.10. Previous decisions were distinguished based on the specific facts and issues involved. Additionally, the Tribunal found that the show cause notices were issued within the statutory time limit, rejecting the appellant's argument regarding time-barring of the demand.

In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the classification of the charging and discharging machines as parts under sub-heading 8455.90, in line with the respondent's arguments. The appeal was rejected, and the impugned Order was upheld.

This detailed analysis provides a comprehensive overview of the legal judgment, including the arguments presented by both parties and the reasoning behind the Tribunal's decision on the classification issue.