2016 (9) TMI 572 - AT - Central Excise

Classification - whether the various types of welded Wire Mesh, which has been supplied to poultry farms and is being used as poultry farm accessories to cover the poultry cage is to be classified under the heading 7314 by treating the same as articles of Iron & Steel or to be classified under heading 8436 as goods for poultry keeping machinery chargeable to nil rate of duty - Held that the goods manufactured by the appellant are in the form of Welded Wire Mesh and are supplied to poultry farms and claimed to be specifically designed parts of poultry keeping machinery. If the goods are considered as simple products of Iron & Steel, the classification indicated is Heading 7314. Further, it is found that in the case of C.C.E. Hyderabad vs. Weld Fuse Pvt Ltd 2006 (10) TMI 307 - CESTAT, BANGALORE , where the classification of similar goods have been examined, it has been decided that the goods in question are more appropriately classifiable as parts of poultry machinery falling within the scope of tariff Entry no. 84369100. Therefore, the issue of classification of welded wire mesh made specifically for poultry keeping is no longer res-intgra and the classification is ordered under 84369100. - Decided in favour of appellant

Summary

Issues:
Classification dispute regarding central excise duty on welded Wire Mesh supplied to poultry farms.

Analysis:
1. Classification Dispute: The appellant, engaged in manufacturing welded Wire Mesh supplied to poultry farms, faced a classification dispute regarding the central excise duty. Initially paying duty under heading 7314, they later switched to 8436, which attracted nil rate of duty. The revenue issued a show cause notice demanding duty for clearances made during a specific period. The Commissioner confirmed the classification under 7314, demanding duty, which was challenged in the present appeal.

2. Legal Precedents: The Tribunal referred to a previous decision classifying similar articles under 8436.99, attracting nil duty rate. However, a subsequent Delhi High Court decision classified similar goods under 7314, initiating proceedings against the appellant. The Tribunal noted the change in the Central Excise Tariff to 8-digit classification in 2005, affecting the classification of goods during the period in question (2009-13).

3. Detailed Analysis: The Tribunal examined the specific nature of the goods manufactured by the appellant, emphasizing their use as parts of poultry keeping machinery. Citing a previous order from the Commissioner of Central Excise, Hyderabad, the Tribunal concluded that the Wire Mesh should be classified under 84369100, considering the nature and purpose of the product.

4. Legal Position: The Tribunal analyzed the legal position, noting that the tariff heading 84369100 pertains to parts of poultry keeping machinery, not machinery itself. They highlighted the standard unit of measurement and the functional aspect of the Wire Mesh within the overall machinery, emphasizing the Board's clarification on the scope of exemption under relevant notifications.

5. Final Decision: Considering the precedents, legal interpretations, and the specific nature of the goods, the Tribunal concluded that the Wire Mesh made for poultry keeping should be classified under 84369100. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed, indicating a favorable outcome for the appellant in the classification dispute.

In conclusion, the detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the classification dispute, legal precedents, specific nature of the goods, and the final decision by the Tribunal, providing a comprehensive overview of the issues involved and the reasoning behind the judgment.