2001 (2) TMI 134 - SC - Customs

Whether Rough Ophthalmic Blanks falls under tariff item No. 23-A(4) or under Residuary Tariff item No. 68 of Central Excise Tariff? Held that - No hesitation to hold that Rough Optical Blanks would not come under Tariff Item No. 23A (4) and will come under Residuary Tariff Item No. 68. Thus the appeal has merit and it is allowed by setting aside the impugned judgment.

Summary

Issues:
Classification of Rough Ophthalmic Blanks under tariff item No. 23-A(4) or Residuary Tariff item No. 68 of Central Excise Tariff.

Analysis:
The appeal in question revolved around the classification of Rough Ophthalmic Blanks for the purpose of imposing counter-vailing duty. The dispute arose when the appellant, who imported the goods, was asked to pay the duty under Residuary Tariff item No. 68, a decision upheld by various authorities leading to the appeal before the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi. The core issue was whether Rough Ophthalmic Blanks should be classified under Tariff item No. 23-A(4) or under the Residuary Tariff item No. 68.

The Tribunal rejected the appellant's argument that Rough Ophthalmic Blanks should not be considered as glass but as a specialized commodity for manufacturing spectacle lenses. It emphasized that the classification should be based on the identity of the goods as per the relevant description in the First Schedule to the Act or commercial understanding. The Tribunal also referred to the Indian Standard Glossary of terms relating to glass and glassware to support its decision.

The appellant's counsel argued that Rough Ophthalmic Blanks are made from glass, citing other authorities. However, the court found it unnecessary to delve into these authorities as the manufacturing process of the goods was not disputed. The revenue's position was that the goods fell under Tariff Item 23-A(4) as articles of glass.

The court considered the amended Tariff Item 23-A(4) and the residuary Tariff item 68, noting that the duty rate differed based on the classification. It highlighted the principle that the interpretation of such items should focus on how the product is identified by those dealing with or using it, rather than its scientific or technical aspects. The court emphasized that Rough Optical Blanks, with their specialized utility for making spectacle lenses, should not be classified as glassware under Tariff Item No. 23A(4).

Drawing on precedents, including the case of Atul Glass Industries (Pvt.) Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, the court concluded that Rough Optical Blanks should be classified under Residuary Tariff Item No. 68, setting aside the previous judgment and allowing the appeal. The parties were directed to bear their own costs in the case.