2018 (2) TMI 904 - AT - Central Excise

Classification of goods - PVC/ HDPE Pipes, HDPE Sprinkler - benefit of N/N. 3/2005 dated 24/02/2005 (S. No.70) - whether classified under chapter 39 or under chapter 84? - Held that - The appellant could establish that these pipes which were manufactured and cleared by them are intended for irrigational purpose in agriculture/ horticulture - the classification of the product under Chapter 39 is not sustainable - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues: Classification of PVC pipes for exemption under Notification No.3/2005 dated 24/02/2005

Analysis:
1. Issue: Classification of PVC pipes under Tariff Heading 8424/9000 or Chapter 39 heading 3917.
- Details: The Revenue contested the classification of PVC pipes claiming exemption under Notification No.3/2005. The lower Authority denied the exemption, stating that the pipes are more appropriately classifiable under chapter 39 heading 3917 as plastic tubes and pipes.

2. Issue: Eligibility for exemption based on the intended use of the PVC pipes.
- Details: The appellant argued that the PVC pipes were specifically manufactured to suit agricultural/ horticultural irrigation purposes, meeting BIS standard IS:12786. The pipes had specific characteristics for this purpose, with flexibility for rerolling and reuse. The pipes were embossed with "irrigation lateral pipe with IS number" and were intended for irrigation use.

3. Issue: Denial of exemption by the Original Authority.
- Details: The Original Authority denied the exemption, stating that the goods were cleared separately and did not fulfill the end-use requirement. The appellant provided evidence, including sample invoices and previous favorable decisions in similar disputes, to support their claim for exemption.

4. Issue: Tribunal's analysis and decision.
- Details: The Tribunal examined the sample pipes and found that they were manufactured to IS specifications for irrigation purposes. The Tribunal noted that the IS specification detailed the product's nature and ingredients for the intended purpose. The Tribunal disagreed with the Original Authority's reasoning and found that the classification of the product under Chapter 39 was not sustainable. The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeals, concluding that the PVC pipes were intended for irrigation use in agriculture/horticulture.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the key issues involved, arguments presented by both parties, the Tribunal's evaluation, and the final decision regarding the classification and exemption of PVC pipes under the relevant notification.