1996 (7) TMI 220 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues: Classification of imported goods under Heading 73.15(2) or Heading 84.60 of the CTA, 1975.

In the judgment delivered by the Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, New Delhi, the issue at hand was the classification of imported goods, specifically stainless steel sheets with mirror finish, under either Heading 73.15(2) or Heading 84.60 of the CTA, 1975. The original authority had initially classified the goods under Heading 73.15(2) based on composition, physical properties, finish, and usage, treating them as stainless steel plates. The Collector (Appeals) upheld this classification, rejecting the argument that the goods should be classified under Heading 84.60 as parts of machinery, citing the absence of characteristics of a mould or identifiable parts of machinery.

The appellants, in their communication, referenced previous orders of the CEGAT and the Supreme Court to support their claim for classification under Heading 84.60. The Tribunal considered these submissions along with the arguments reiterated by the ld. DR. The Tribunal noted that in previous judgments, press plates for producing plastic laminates had been classified under Heading 84.60 instead of Heading 73.15, emphasizing the need for goods to function as moulds to be classified as such. The Tribunal highlighted the importance of demonstrating the intended function of the goods in question.

The Tribunal specifically mentioned a judgment dated 14-3-1990, where it was stated that the shape or design of moulds was no longer the sole criterion for classification, but the functionality as a mould was crucial. In the absence of evidence showing the impugned goods' function as moulds, the Tribunal concluded that the goods should be classified under Heading 84.59(2) as parts of machinery, aligning with the later judgment's reasoning upheld by the Supreme Court.

Ultimately, following the precedent set by the later judgment and considering the lack of evidence supporting the goods' function as moulds, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, set aside the classification under Heading 73.15(2), and ordered for the classification under Heading 84.59(2) of the CTA.