9911796707
|
Home
Issues: Classification of goods under Customs Tariff - Plain Polyester Film as Electrical Insulators.
Analysis: 1. The appeal contested the classification of "POLYESTER FILM - PLAIN (MELINEX-226)" under sub-heading 3920.69 instead of the claim for classification as "Electrical Insulators - Other" under sub-heading No. 8546.90. The appellants argued that the goods should benefit from Notification 60/87-Cus., dated 1-3-1987, for insulators designed for use in electrical circuits of 400 volts or above. 2. The appellants referenced the Import Licensing Policy and highlighted the insulating properties of the Polyester Film. They relied on previous Tribunal decisions, such as Collector of Central Excise v. Metro Wood Engineering Works and Chetna Polycoats (P) Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, to support their claim that industrial laminates with insulation properties were classified as electrical insulators under sub-heading 8546.00. 3. The appellants emphasized the high dielectric strength and insulation properties of the Polyester Film based on technical literature from M/s. I.C.I. They argued that the goods were intended and used as insulators in electric motors, citing a specific example of an electric motor for SR-1622 compressor using Melinex Polyester Film for insulation purposes. 4. During the hearing, the appellants' counsel highlighted previous Tribunal decisions, such as Bakelite Hylam Ltd., Hyderabad v. Collector of Central Excise, to support the classification of the goods as electrical insulators based on their essential insulation properties, particularly emphasizing the product's insulation characteristics. 5. The Department argued that the intended use of the Polyester Film was not relevant for classification under the Customs Tariff, emphasizing that the goods were imported in running length and needed to be cut and adjusted for use as insulators. They cited the decision in the case of Miles India Ltd. v. Collector of Customs, Bombay, to support the classification based on the condition in which the goods were imported. 6. The lower authorities rejected the appellants' classification claim under sub-heading 8546.90, stating that the goods did not meet the specific requirements for electrical insulators under Chapter Heading 8546. They emphasized that the goods were imported as Plain Polyester Films and were not identifiable parts of machinery/equipment. 7. The Tribunal agreed with the lower authorities, noting that the goods were described as Plain Polyester Film from the time of order placement to customs clearance. They dismissed the appeal, citing the Supreme Court's decision in Dunlop India Ltd. & Madras Rubber Factory Ltd. v. Union of India, which emphasized the statutory classification of goods under distinct entries based on common parlance and known descriptions. In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the classification of the goods as Plain Polyester Film under sub-heading 3920.69, denying the claim for classification as electrical insulators under sub-heading 8546.90 based on the goods' description, import documentation, and lack of specific characteristics required for electrical insulators under the Customs Tariff.
|
