2008 (7) TMI 827 - Commissioner - Central Excise

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Classification of criss-cross rubber patches.
2. Applicability of Chapter Note 9 of Chapter 40.
3. Consistency in classification across different jurisdictions.

Summary:

Issue 1: Classification of Criss-Cross Rubber Patches
The appellants, M/s. Pang Rubber Products and M/s. Samarth Rubber Products Ltd., claimed classification of their criss-cross rubber patches u/s 4016.99, while the Department contended they should be classified u/s 4008.21. The Assistant Commissioner initially classified the products u/s 4008.21, relying on Chapter Note 9 of Chapter 40 and the CEGAT decision in MRF Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise [1993 (67) E.L.T. 968 (T)]. The Commissioner (Appeals) reversed this, classifying the products u/s 4016.99, noting that similar products were classified under the same heading in other jurisdictions.

Issue 2: Applicability of Chapter Note 9 of Chapter 40
The Department argued that Chapter Note 9, specifically sub-para 3, which includes plates, sheets, and strips cut to shape for resoling or repairing rubber tyres, justified classification u/s 4008.21. The appellants countered that their products were not in the form of plates, sheets, or strips and thus should not fall under this heading. They cited historical classifications and previous decisions, including the MRF case, to support their claim.

Issue 3: Consistency in Classification Across Different Jurisdictions
The appellants highlighted that similar products were classified u/s 4016.99 in other jurisdictions, such as Coimbatore and Dindigul, and argued that their products should not be treated differently. The Apex Court directed the Commissioner (Appeals) to compare the manufacturing processes and products of the appellants with those classified u/s 4016.99 in other jurisdictions.

Judgment:
The Commissioner (Appeals) visited the relevant factories and compared the products and manufacturing processes. It was found that the appellants' products were similar to those classified u/s 4016.99 in other jurisdictions. Consequently, the Commissioner (Appeals) concluded that the criss-cross rubber patches should be classified u/s 4016.99, not u/s 4008.21, aligning with the historical and consistent classification practices across different jurisdictions.