2007 (1) TMI 52 - AT - Central Excise

Classification Alleged that the appellant good (Catch Covers) are classifiable under Chapter 48 and accordingly Joint Commissioner invoked extended period of limitation and duty demanded alongwith interest and penalty The learned JDR for the Revenue accepted the bonafide belief of appellant and allowed appeal partly

Summary

Issues:
1. Time bar for demand under Central Excise procedures.
2. Classification of products under Central Excise Tariff Act 1985.

Analysis:
1. The appeal was filed against an order confirming duty demand for failure to comply with Central Excise procedures. The Commissioner (Appeals) affirmed the classification of the products but remanded the case for adjudication on abatements. The Joint Commissioner held the appellants eligible for abatements but demanded duty under Rule 9(2) of the Central Excise Rules. The appellants challenged this order before the Tribunal.
2. The appellant argued that the demand was time-barred due to a genuine belief that the goods were not excisable, citing the illness of the company's proprietor. They also contended that the products should be classified under CSH 49.01.90 of the Central Excise Tariff Act 1985. The appellant relied on case laws to support their classification argument. The Departmental Representative cited a Tribunal decision classifying similar goods under Chapter 48. The Tribunal found that the impugned goods were correctly classified under Chapter 48 based on previous decisions. Regarding limitation, the Tribunal accepted the appellant's bona fide belief and limited the demand to the normal period, directing duty discharge within two months. The appeal was partially allowed on these grounds.