2002 (8) TMI 368 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues: Classification of exported goods as Pig iron products for DEPB benefit and whether Piston Rings can be considered Automotive Castings (Machined)

Classification of goods as Pig iron products for DEPB benefit:
The appellant, M/s. Saral Creations, appealed against the order of the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) which held that there was insufficient evidence to establish that the Piston Rings exported were Pig iron products. The ld. Commissioner noted the absence of test reports or composition details of the Piston Rings and questioned the applicability of the DGFT clarification, which was specific to another export. The Tribunal concurred with the ld. Commissioner's findings, emphasizing that the evidence on record was inadequate to prove the goods were Pig iron products. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the decision, rejecting the appeal.

Classification of Piston Rings as Automotive Castings (Machined):
The Dy. Commissioner denied DEPB benefits to the appellant, stating that the Piston Rings were identifiable as Automobile Engine parts and could not be classified as Automotive Castings (Machined). The Dy. Commissioner highlighted that in commercial terms, these items were commonly known as Piston Rings and not Automotive Castings. The Tribunal considered the arguments presented by both parties. It noted that the goods were described as Automotive Castings (Machined) Piston Rings in the invoice and shipping bill. The appellant referenced an opinion from the DGFT regarding Piston Ring Sets, claiming similarity with their exported goods. However, the Tribunal observed that the opinion was specific to Piston Ring Sets made of Iron Castings and not Automotive Castings (Machined) Piston Rings. The Tribunal concluded that the goods had taken the shape of Automotive Castings (Machined) but this aspect was not disclosed to the DGFT. As Piston Rings were not explicitly listed under Automotive parts for DEPB benefits, the Tribunal upheld the ld. Commissioner's decision, rejecting the appeal based on the lack of evidence to support the classification of the goods as Automotive Castings (Machined).