2004 (9) TMI 436 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Classification of manufactured items under specific Chapter Headings.
2. Interpretation of "parts of general use" under the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985.
3. Application of precedents in determining classification of goods.

Analysis:
1. The case involved a Revenue appeal against an Order-in-Appeal where the Commissioner did not accept the departmental appeal against the Order-in-Original classifying Gaskets and Backing rings. The department sought to classify the items under Chapter Heading 3926.90 as articles of plastics. However, the assessee argued that the items were specifically manufactured for Watches and Hydraulic Pumps, not for general use. The Assistant Commissioner agreed with the assessee, citing precedents like Plasticraft Industries and Hegal Capsules Industries, which held similar items were not parts of general use but classified under different headings.

2. The Revenue contended that the items should be classified as parts of articles of plastic as they were of general use. The Tribunal, after hearing the arguments, found that the items were not of general use but specifically designed for Watches and Hydraulic Pumps. The Tribunal distinguished the judgments cited by the Revenue, emphasizing that the items in question were custom-made for specific purposes and not for general use. The Tribunal upheld the Assistant Commissioner's decision based on the precedents and rejected the Revenue's appeal.

3. The Tribunal analyzed the precedents cited by the Revenue, such as Castiplast Pvt. Ltd. and Rex Rubber Works, where parts were classified as articles of plastic due to being of general use. However, the Tribunal distinguished these cases from the current situation, highlighting that the items under consideration were specifically manufactured for particular uses and not intended for general applications. By relying on the judgments in Plasticraft Industries and Hegal Capsules Industries, the Tribunal affirmed the classification of the items under different headings, emphasizing their specific design and purpose.

In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the classification of Gaskets and Backing rings under specific Chapter Headings, rejecting the Revenue's appeal based on the items' specific manufacturing for Watches and Hydraulic Pumps, which distinguished them from being considered as parts of general use under the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985.