9911796707
|
Home
Issues: Assessment of Boring Bar and Cutting Blades under different tariff headings
Analysis: The dispute in this case revolves around the proper classification of the imported Boring Bar and Cutting Blades. The appellants argue that the Boring Bar, which serves as a tool holder for the cutting blades, should be classified under Heading 84.45/48 as machine tools. They emphasize that the cutting blades are not interchangeable tools but are specifically designed for use with the Boring Bar. The appellants rely on the description of tool holders in the B.T.N. extract to support their classification argument. On the other hand, the respondent contends that the Boring Bar and Cutting Blades should be treated as a composite item under Chapter 82.05, as they were imported as complete sets. The respondent refers to Rule 2(a) for interpretation, stating that unassembled articles should be considered complete articles. Additionally, the respondent argues that the essential character of the goods lies in the blades, leading to the classification under Chapter 82.05. The respondent points to Section Note-XVI. 1J, which excludes articles falling under Chapter 82 or 83, further supporting their classification argument. The appellants had declared the Boring Bar separately under Chapter 84.45/48 and the Blades under 82.05 in the Bill of Entry. They rely on engineering references to establish the function and classification of the Boring Bar as a machine tool under Heading 84.45/48. However, the Collector's physical examination concluded that the imported goods, with carbide-tipped cutters attached to a base metal support, constitute composite tools falling under Chapter 82.05(1). The description of Heading 82.05 aligns with the function of boring and specifically mentions interchangeable tools for machine tools for boring, supporting the respondent's classification argument. Ultimately, the Tribunal upholds the department's classification under Chapter 82.05 for the Boring Bar and Cutting Blades as a single composite article. The Tribunal emphasizes that composite articles invoiced as a set should be assessed under a single tariff heading and not separately. The decision highlights that the imported goods were specifically designed for use in the boring machine, reinforcing the classification under Heading 82.05. As the offence under the I.T.C. was not disputed, the confiscation and fine imposed are deemed appropriate, leading to the dismissal of the appeal due to lack of merit.
|
