2018 (3) TMI 244 - AT - Central Excise

Classification of goods - Servo 2T Supreme - Held that - When, in the instant case, the assessee-appellant is jobworker, the principal, IOCL who has accepted the chemical analysis and the composition, by merely wrong mentioning of sub-heading in the invoices cannot be changed the chance of the appellant/assessee - the classification has rightly brought under heading 3403 of the CETA, 1985 - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant.

Summary

Issues: Classification of goods under Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985

Analysis:
The appellant, a jobworker engaged in re-packing 'blended oil products,' appealed against the department's classification of the material under sub-heading 3403 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (CETA, 1985), whereas the appellant claimed it should be under sub-heading 2710.90. The appellant argued that the invoices from Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. (IOCL) mentioned the same sub-heading as claimed by the appellant. The appellant also referred to previous Tribunal cases where testing was deemed necessary, which had not been done in this case despite requests. The appellant contended that IOCL's classification based on chemical analysis was justifiable. The department, represented by the learned A.R., presented a chemical report and statements supporting the classification under sub-heading 3403. After hearing both sides and reviewing the evidence, the Tribunal noted that sending the material for chemical testing at this stage was unnecessary as IOCL had already provided the chemical composition. The Tribunal found merit in the chemical analysis report by IOCL and the evidence presented in the show-cause notice and order-in-original. The Tribunal emphasized that the classification, based on the documents submitted by IOCL employees, was correct under heading 3403 of CETA, 1985. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the impugned order and dismissed the appellant's appeal.

In conclusion, the Tribunal's decision was based on the classification of goods under the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, with a focus on the chemical analysis provided by IOCL and the documentation supporting the classification under heading 3403. The Tribunal found that the appellant's claim for a different sub-heading was not justified, and the impugned order was sustained.