2014 (12) TMI 112 - AT - Central Excise

Classification of metal rolling mills and its various parts - whether the items, are to be classified as part of the rolling mills under Heading No. 8455.90 or the same are to be classified under Heading No. 84.28 - Held that - The respondent manufacture rolling mills and their parts. During the period of dispute while Heading No. 84.55 covered metal rolling mills and rolls thereof, sub-heading No. 8455.10 covered all goods other than parts and sub-heading No. 8455.90 covered parts . All these items are not the rollers through which the metal passes but are the equipments for lifting, handling, loading and unloading of the materials which are in the nature of auxiliary equipment, essential for operation of rolling mills - charging and discharging machines for hot strips rolling mills which are also in the nature of auxiliary equipment essential for operation of rolling mills, would be classifiable as part of the rolling mills under sub-heading No. 8455.90 and not only a civil appeal filed by the assessee against this judgment was dismissed by the Apex Court vide judgment reported in 2003 (3) TMI 704 - Supreme Court of India , but the review petition against the dismissal of civil appeal was also dismissed vide judgment reported in 2003 (10) TMI 633 - Supreme Court of India . In view of this, keeping in view the principles laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala, reported in 2000 (7) TMI 67 - SUPREME Court , the Apex Court s order in case of Beekay Engineering & Castings Ltd. (2002 (4) TMI 546 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI) affirming the Tribunal judgment becomes a binding precedent. Therefore, we hold that the items mentioned above would be correctly classifiable under sub-heading No. 8455.90 as parts of rolling mills and not under heading No. 8428.00/8428.90 as held by the Commissioner (Appeals). The impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals) is, therefore, not correct as the same is contrary to the law laid down by the Apex Court on this issue. - Decided in favour of Revenue.

Summary

Issues involved:
Classification of parts of metal rolling mills under the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985.

Analysis:
1. The dispute arose regarding the classification of various parts of metal rolling mills under the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The respondent initially classified the parts under sub-heading No. 8455.90 but later revised it to sub-heading No. 8455.10, claiming them as complete handling machinery for hot strip rolling mills. The Asstt. Commissioner classified some parts under sub-heading No. 8455.90 and others under sub-heading No. 8428.00/8428.90. The Commissioner (Appeals) confirmed the duty demand dropped by the Asstt. Commissioner, leading to an appeal before the Tribunal.

2. The Tribunal remanded the matter to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a fresh decision, emphasizing the distinction between auxiliary equipment and parts of rolling mills. In the de novo proceedings, the Commissioner (Appeals) classified the parts under Heading 84.28 as equipment for lifting, loading, and unloading material, contrary to the initial classification under sub-heading No. 8455.90. The respondent challenged this classification.

3. The Department argued that the items in question should be classified under sub-heading No. 8455.90 based on a binding precedent set by the Apex Court in a similar case. The respondent contended that the Commissioner (Appeals) correctly classified the items under Heading 84.28 in accordance with the Tribunal's remand order.

4. After considering both sides, the Tribunal found that the disputed items were essential auxiliary equipment for the operation of rolling mills, not parts suitable for use solely with rolling machines. Citing a previous case and the Apex Court's decision, the Tribunal held that the items should be classified under sub-heading No. 8455.90 as parts of rolling mills, overturning the Commissioner (Appeals) classification under Heading 84.28. The duty demand dropped by the Commissioner (Appeals) was confirmed.

5. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the Revenue's appeal, setting aside the Commissioner (Appeals) order and confirming the classification of the disputed items under sub-heading No. 8455.90. The duty demand of &8377; 60,49,079/- was upheld.

In conclusion, the Tribunal's judgment clarified the classification of parts of metal rolling mills under the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, based on the distinction between auxiliary equipment and parts of rolling mills, following a binding precedent set by the Apex Court.