2005 (12) TMI 32 - AT - Central Excise

Central Excise - To produce the Bullet proof door/window aluminium frame with glass as filler material used - Classification

Summary

Issues involved:
Classification of imported goods under Central Excise Tariff Heading 7610 vs. 7020.10

Detailed Analysis:
The appeal was filed against the Order-in-Appeal No. 66/2002-Cus dated 16.10.2002 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs (Appeals), Bangalore. The appellants imported two Bullet Proof Doors and Windows and claimed classification under Central Excise Tariff Heading 7610 for "aluminium structures, aluminium doors", while the Revenue argued for classification under 7020.10 for "other articles of glasses". The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the classification under Chapter 70, which led the appellants to approach the Tribunal for relief.

The appellants' learned Consultant argued various points, including that the goods were commercially known as bullet proof doors, and referenced Interpretative Rules to support their classification under Heading 7610. They also cited several case laws to strengthen their argument. On the other hand, the Revenue contended that the essential characteristic of the goods was the glass, leading to classification as "articles of glass".

Upon careful examination of the case records, it was revealed that the impugned items were described as bullet proof glass doors/windows with an aluminium frame. The Tribunal noted that the items were known commercially as doors/windows and that the essential character was imparted by the bullet proof glass. The Tribunal also considered the Tariff Heading 7610 describing aluminium structures, doors, and windows. The Original authority had classified the goods under Heading 7020.90 for "other articles of glass" based on the essential characteristic of the glass.

The Tribunal analyzed various case laws cited by the appellants, emphasizing the need for caution in applying residuary entries and the primary function of the article in determining classification. Ultimately, the Tribunal concluded that the impugned goods should be classified as aluminium doors/windows due to their nature as bullet proof glass doors/windows with an aluminium frame. The decision favored the appellants, allowing the appeal and pronouncing the judgment on 7.12.2005.