1996 (6) TMI 130 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues: Classification of product under Central Excise Tariff

Issue 1: Correct classification of the product
The appeal was filed against the order of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay regarding the classification of a product described by the appellants, who are manufacturers of Copper and Copper Alloys. The dispute was whether the product should be classified under T.I. 26A(ia) with exemption benefits or under T.I. 26A(2) as a strip. The appellants claimed it should be classified under T.I. 26A(ia) while the department argued it falls under T.I. 26A(2).

Analysis:
The appellants argued that the commercial parlance and the definition of 'strip' from the ISI Glossary of Terms for Copper and Copper Alloys supported their claim that the product should not be classified as a strip. They contended that their product, not rectangular or square, did not fit the definition of a strip. On the other hand, the department asserted that the product, described as flat by the appellants, was known in the market as a strip. They argued that the product was a manufactured item resulting from the rolling of wire bars, falling under T.I. 26A(2).

Issue 2: Interpretation of Central Excise Tariff
The Tribunal examined the relevant provisions of the Central Excise Tariff, specifically T.I. 26A, which covers Copper and Copper Alloys. It noted that wire bars and wire rods fell under T.I. 26A(ia) while specified manufactured products like plates, sheets, and strips were classified under T.I. 26A(2).

Analysis:
The Tribunal found that the disputed item was not directly from an ore-based copper and copper alloys industry, as the raw materials had already been processed into wire bars before being rolled into the final product. Since the appellants themselves referred to the product as strips or flats and did not provide details on size or thickness to exclude it from the definition of strips, the Tribunal upheld the lower authority's classification of the product as a strip under T.I. 26A(2). The appeal was rejected based on this analysis.

In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the classification of the product as a strip under T.I. 26A(2) of the Central Excise Tariff, based on the manufacturing process and the description provided by the appellants themselves.