2002 (11) TMI 603 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues: Classification of goods as "Zinc dross & ash" or "Zinc alloy" under Central Excise Tariff Schedule

In this case, the main issue revolves around the classification of goods described by the assessee as "Zinc dross & ash" and by the Revenue as "Zinc alloy" under the Central Excise Tariff Schedule. The assessee argues for classification under sub-heading 2620.00, while the Revenue contends for classification under SH 7901.20. The dispute arises from the galvanization process and the composition of the goods in question.

The learned Counsel for the appellants argues that the goods did not involve intentional addition of metals to qualify as a Zinc alloy. The Chemical Test Report did not conclusively establish the goods as a Zinc alloy. The Commissioner's decision was challenged based on non-compliance with the Tribunal's remand order and the absence of intentional metal addition. The Counsel also cites a previous Tribunal decision supporting the appellants' classification claim.

On the other hand, the learned DR asserts that intentional addition of lead and aluminium occurred during the manufacturing process, resulting in the production of Zinc alloy. The Commissioner's classification was based on the Test Report, which indicated the presence of zinc, iron, and silicon in the sample.

Upon careful consideration, the Tribunal notes that the Test Report did not definitively classify the sample as a Zinc alloy, as it did not meet the statutory requirement regarding the total content of other elements exceeding 2.5%. The Commissioner's decision solely relied on the Test Report without further basis, overlooking the essential criteria for classifying goods as Zinc alloy under SH 7901.20.

The Tribunal refers to a previous case to support the assessee's claim under SH 2620.00, emphasizing the lack of reasoning in the impugned order for rejecting this classification. Following these findings, the Tribunal concludes that the goods are classifiable under SH 2620.00 of the Central Excise Tariff Schedule, thereby vacating the demand for differential duty. The impugned order is set aside, and the appeal is allowed.