Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2004 (2) TMI AT This
Issues:
Classification of inks for marker pens under sub-heading 3215.10 or 3215.90 of the Central Excise Tariff Act. Analysis: The judgment revolves around the classification of inks for marker pens under sub-heading 3215.10 or 3215.90 of the Central Excise Tariff Act. The appellant, M/s. G.M. Pens International Ltd., claimed that the inks should be classified under sub-heading 3215.10, while the Commissioner confirmed classification under sub-heading 3215.90. The issue has been a subject of various decisions, including those of the Tribunal, where it was held that marker inks fall under sub-heading 3215.90. The appellant argued that the decisions were based on HSN Explanatory Notes, which may not be directly applicable to the Central Excise Tariff Act. The Tribunal analyzed the Customs Tariff and Central Excise Tariff headings related to inks. The Customs Tariff included printing ink, writing or drawing ink, and other inks under Heading 32.15, with sub-headings 3215.10 for writing ink and 3215.90 for other inks. The Explanatory Notes of HSN detailed different categories of inks, including ordinary writing or drawing inks and other inks. The Tribunal noted that the Central Excise Tariff sub-headings were not aligned with HSN, leading to a discrepancy in classification. The Tribunal further delved into the interpretation of the Explanatory Notes of HSN, emphasizing that sub-heading 3215.10 in the Central Excise Tariff should cover both ordinary writing or drawing inks and other inks if they are writing inks. It was highlighted that inks for ball point pens, a specialized type of ink, fell under the category of other inks. The Tribunal disagreed with the previous decision that marker inks should be classified under sub-heading 3215.90, as it was not established that marker ink is not a writing ink. Given the differing views within the Tribunal, the case was referred to the Larger Bench for a conclusive decision on the classification of marker ink. The judgment underscores the importance of aligning classification decisions with the specific provisions of the Central Excise Tariff Act, especially in cases involving specialized products like marker inks.
|