2004 (8) TMI 490 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues: Classification of goods under Central Excise Tariff; Burden of proof on the Department; Prima facie case of the appellant

The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Kolkata involved the classification of goods under the Central Excise Tariff, the burden of proof on the Department to change the well-settled position, and the establishment of a prima facie case by the appellant. The appellant was represented by Senior Advocate S.K. Bagaria assisted by Advocate Partha Banerjee, while the respondent was represented by Shri T.K. Kar. The order was delivered by Member (T) V.K. Jain.

Regarding the classification of goods, the appellant's counsel referred to the Order-in-Appeal, HSN Notes, and Section Note 2 of Section XVI of the Central Excise Tariff. He cited judgments from the Hon'ble Supreme Court and a previous decision of the Tribunal to argue that the burden of proof lies on the Department if they seek to change the established classification of goods. The appellant contended that the goods in question were not plastic insulators based on advice from the Director General, Research, Designs, and Standard Organisation of the Ministry of Railways.

On the other hand, the Department relied on a Board's Circular and a Tariff Advice from the C.B.E.C. The Senior Departmental Representative (SDR) emphasized these documents to support the Department's position in the classification dispute.

After hearing both sides, the Tribunal found that the appellant had a prima facie case in their favor. Consequently, the Tribunal decided to dispense with the duty and scheduled the case for regular hearing on a later date. This decision indicates that the Tribunal found merit in the appellant's arguments and decided in their favor based on the evidence and submissions presented during the hearing.