2009 (8) TMI 604 - AT - Central Excise

Classification- The dispute in the matter relates to classification of the product manufactured by the appellant during the periods from July 1996 to December, 1996 and July, 1998 to September, 2000.The issue pertaining to the classification of the product manufactured by the appellants like steel tubes for telephone and telegraph poles which are known as Hamilton Tubes were sought to be wrongly ordered to be classified by the Department under sub-heading 7308.90 in spite of the fact that the Tribunal has disallowed such classification and has held that product is classifiable under sub-heading 7306.90 and even the Supreme Court has refused to interfere in the said order when the Department had to challenge the order passed by the Tribunal. Held that- The appeals are accordingly disposed of by holding that the product in question is classifiable under sub-heading 7306.90 as held by the Tribunal. However, at the same time, it is also to be noted that the appellant being Government under Notification No. 197/87-CE., dated 20th August, 1987, it does not apply to the product classifiable under sub-heading 7306.90. It is also to be noted that said notification has to be read along with Notification No. 89/95 dated 16th May, 1995 and Notification No. 62/95 dated 16th March, 1995. Having so read it is apparent that the appellants are not entitled for the exemption in terms of the Notifications. The appeals are disposed of in above terms.

Summary

Issues:
Classification of the product manufactured by the appellant during specific periods.

Analysis:
The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, New Delhi, involved a dispute regarding the classification of a product manufactured by the appellant during certain periods. The appellant contended that the product, steel tubes for telephone and telegraph poles known as Hamilton Tubes, was wrongly classified by the Department under sub-heading 7308.90. The appellant argued that the Tribunal had previously classified the product under sub-heading 7306.90, a decision upheld by the Supreme Court when challenged by the Department. The Tribunal noted interruptions by the appellant's representative during proceedings but proceeded to consider past cases where similar classification issues had arisen.

In referencing past cases, the Tribunal highlighted the decision in Quality Steel Products Pvt. Ltd. v. C.C.E. and the subsequent dismissal of the challenge by the Apex Court. Additionally, the Tribunal mentioned Appeals No. E/2506 and 2609 of 1998, where a different classification was applied based on specific precedents. The Tribunal emphasized the need to apply consistent rulings, especially when the Apex Court did not interfere with previous decisions. Ultimately, the Tribunal concluded that the product in question should be classified under sub-heading 7306.90, aligning with its earlier determination.

Furthermore, the Tribunal addressed the appellant's claim for exemption under Notification No. 197/87-CE, explaining that the exemption did not apply to products classified under sub-heading 7306.90. The Tribunal clarified that the appellant was not entitled to exemptions under specific notifications dated in 1987, 1995, and 1995 when the product fell under the classification of sub-heading 7306.90. As a result, the appeals were disposed of with a decision on the classification and the eligibility for exemptions based on the specific sub-heading under which the product was classified.