1995 (5) TMI 146 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Classification of bulb-holder assembly under Tariff Item 61 or Tariff Item 68.

Analysis:
The appellant company had been classifying the bulb-holder assembly under Tariff Item 68 of the Central Excise Tariff. However, a show cause notice was issued proposing classification under Tariff Item 61, leading to a dispute. The Assistant Collector initially held the assembly to be correctly classified under Item 68. The Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) later ruled in favor of classification under Tariff Item 61, prompting the appellant to appeal.

The appellant argued that the goods were specialized for use in motor vehicles, designed for specific voltage, and not suitable for general lighting systems. They contended that since the goods were not listed as motor vehicle parts under Tariff Item 34A, they should be classified under Tariff Item 68. The appellant relied on previous tribunal decisions and a Supreme Court judgment to support their classification argument.

The Departmental Representative, on the other hand, argued that the goods fell under Tariff Item 61, which includes switches, plugs, and sockets of all kinds, covering the assembly in question. They referenced a Tariff Advice and a tribunal decision to support their classification stance.

The Tribunal analyzed previous decisions, including the M/s. Deepak Industries case, which dealt with a similar issue of classification of switches, plugs, and sockets for motor vehicles. The Tribunal concluded that the goods in question should be classified under Tariff Item 68, following the rationale of the Deepak Industries case and the absence of contrary evidence. The Tribunal found that the goods were not known as general electric lighting fittings and were specialized for motor vehicles, aligning with the classification under Item 68.

Another Member of the Tribunal concurred with the classification under Tariff Item 68, emphasizing the absence of evidence proving the goods' classification as general electric lighting fittings. The Member referenced the P.M.P. Auto Industries Ltd. case and other tribunal decisions that supported the classification of similar goods under Tariff Item 68 for motor vehicles. The Member agreed with the classification decision based on the specific design and intended use of the goods.

In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the classification of the bulb-holder assembly under Tariff Item 68, considering the specialized nature of the goods for motor vehicles and the absence of evidence supporting classification under Tariff Item 61. The decision aligned with previous tribunal rulings and established legal principles regarding the classification of goods based on their design and intended use.