2002 (10) TMI 391 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Classification of goods under Central Excise Tariff Act - Refund claim for excess duty paid - Approval of classification list - Applicability of Supreme Court judgments.

Analysis:
The case involves an appeal by M/s. Milton Laminates against the Order-in-Appeal rejecting their refund claim for duty paid on electric insulators under the Central Excise Tariff Act. The appellants argued that they paid duty under protest and should be classified under Heading 85.46, not Chapter 39, as decided by the Department. They cited previous judgments supporting their classification. However, the Department contended that the appellants did not challenge the original classification and the approval of the classification list, making the classification final. The Department relied on the Supreme Court's decision in Flock India case, stating that the protest only affects the time limit for refund, not the validity of the order itself.

The Tribunal considered both arguments and found that the appellants did not challenge the changed classification approved by the Department, leading to its finality. The Tribunal emphasized that an order remains in force unless set aside by an appellate authority or court, which was not the case here. The Tribunal referred to the Supreme Court's judgment in the Flock India case, highlighting the importance of classification for levy and collection of excise duty. The Supreme Court's ruling stated that if an aggrieved party does not appeal an order, they cannot later claim a refund based on alleged errors in the order. The Tribunal reiterated that payment under protest affects only the time limit for refund and does not invalidate the order itself.

Ultimately, the Tribunal rejected the appeal, concluding that since the approval of the classification list was not challenged or set aside, the refund claim was not maintainable. The Tribunal upheld the Department's classification under Chapter 39 of the Tariff and applied the principles outlined in the Supreme Court's judgment to dismiss the appeal. The decision emphasized the importance of following appeal procedures to challenge classification decisions and affirmed the finality of approved classifications unless overturned by a higher authority.