9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (7) TMI 896 - AT - Central ExciseClassification of boiler parts - The respondents/assessee have adopted the classification as CSH 8402.10 while the department contends the same to be classified under 8402.90 - Held that - reliance placed in the case of COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., PUNE-I Versus THERMAX BOBCOCK & WILCOX LTD. 2005 (1) TMI 145 - CESTAT, MUMBAI , where it was held that the impugned goods are classifiable under CSH 8402.10 upholding the classification adopted by respondents/assessee - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.
Issues involved: Classification of boiler parts under CSH 8402.10 or 8402.90.
Analysis: The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai addressed the issue of classification of boiler parts cleared by the respondents. The respondents classified the parts under CSH 8402.10, while the department argued for classification under 8402.90. The Tribunal considered that boilers are classifiable under CSH 8402.10, while parts of boilers fall under 8402.90. The Tribunal referred to a previous order in the respondents' own case where it was held that the goods are classifiable under CSH 8402.10. This decision was based on the principles established in the case of CCE, Pune I Vs Thermax Bobcock & Wilcox Ltd. The Tribunal noted that the rate of duty for both classifications had become the same from a certain date. The contention revolved around whether the parts cleared were components of boilers or standalone parts. The Tribunal found that the issue had already been settled in previous cases and dismissed the appeals filed by the department, upholding the classification adopted by the respondents. The judgment emphasized that the value of bought-out items used in the erection of boilers should be added to the assessable value of boilers, as decided in previous cases. Ultimately, the appeals were dismissed based on the precedent set by previous decisions and the principles established in relevant case law. This comprehensive analysis of the judgment showcases the Tribunal's reasoning behind the classification of boiler parts and the significance of previous decisions in determining the outcome of the case.
|
