1984 (4) TMI 290 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Classification of glass windscreens (toughened and laminated) under Central Excise Tariff.
2. Classification of insulating glass units/panels under Central Excise Tariff.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Classification of Glass Windscreens:
The primary issue was whether glass windscreens, both toughened and laminated, should be classified under Item 23A(4) ("Other glass and glassware including tableware") or Item 68 ("All other goods, not elsewhere specified") of the Central Excise Tariff.

- Appellants' Argument: The appellants argued that the classification of glass windscreens should be under Item 68, citing previous judgments from the Supreme Court, the Bombay High Court, and the Tribunal itself. They emphasized that these judgments had settled the issue, classifying toughened glass windscreens under Item 68.

- Department's Argument: The Department's Representative sought a reversal of the Tribunal's earlier order, presenting fresh material and new points. He argued that post-1979 amendments to the tariff items made Item 23A(4) more specific for glass windscreens than Item 68. He cited that the Bombay High Court judgment related to a period when the tariff items were different and that the current situation required a new interpretation. He also highlighted that windscreens, despite their specific shape and toughness, were still essentially glass.

- Tribunal's Decision: The Tribunal agreed with the appellants, reiterating its earlier decision and the Bombay High Court's judgment. The Tribunal emphasized that the classification should be approached from a practical and commercial perspective rather than a theoretical one. The Tribunal found no merit in the Department's arguments and maintained that fully finished windscreens, both toughened and laminated, should be classified under Item 68.

2. Classification of Insulating Glass Units/Panels:
The second issue was the classification of insulating glass units/panels, which consisted of two layers of glass sheets encased in an aluminum tubular frame with a desiccant.

- Appellants' Argument: The appellants argued that these units/panels were composite articles with significant contributions from glass, aluminum tubing, and desiccant, and thus should be classified under Item 68.

- Department's Argument: The Department's Representative argued that these units/panels were essentially glass and should be classified under Item 23A(4), citing ISI and BSS specifications that categorized insulating glass under the broad category of glass.

- Tribunal's Decision: The Tribunal examined a sample of the insulating glass units/panels and concluded that they were composite articles where all three materials (glass, aluminum tubing, and desiccant) played significant and functional roles. In the absence of a specific tariff entry for such composite articles, the Tribunal held that these units/panels should be classified under the residuary Item 68.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal ordered that both the fully finished glass windscreens (toughened and laminated) and the insulating glass units/panels should be classified under Item 68 of the Central Excise Tariff. The appeal was allowed, and any consequential relief was to be given to the appellants. The cross-objection by the Department was rejected.