1996 (9) TMI 258 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Classification of products under different headings and eligibility for benefit under Notification 132/86.

Analysis:
The appellants challenged the order of the Collector (Appeals) regarding the classification of products manufactured by the respondents and the denial of benefits under Notification 132/86. The respondents were engaged in manufacturing various reinforced fiber glass plastic articles, including pipes, fittings, ductings, chimneys, towers, tanks, vessels, scrubbers, and gratings. The Assistant Collector classified the items under specific headings, which led to an appeal by the respondents. The Collector (Appeals) accepted some classifications but disputed others, leading to the present appeal. The issue revolved around the correct classification of tanks, vessels, scrubbers, and gratings, as well as the applicability of Notification 132/86.

The Tribunal analyzed the case in detail, considering previous decisions and relevant rules. For tanks and vessels, it was determined that they should be classified under Chapter sub-heading 3926.90, based on their use in chemical plants and lack of evidence to suggest alternative uses. Similarly, scrubbers, being plastic shells of tanks, were also classified under the same heading as vessels and tanks. Gratings, considered fittings for tanks, were classified under Chapter sub-heading 3926.90 as they were made of plastic and fell within the specific chapter covering plastic articles. Consequently, the benefit of Notification 132/86 was deemed applicable to the appellants due to the revised classifications.

Based on the Tribunal's previous decision in a similar case involving the respondents, it was held that vessels, tanks, scrubbers, and gratings should be classified under Heading 3926.90, making them eligible for the benefits under Notification 132/86. As a result, the Department's appeal was dismissed, affirming the modified classifications and the eligibility for the notification's benefits. The judgment provided a detailed analysis of each product category's classification and the rationale behind the decisions, ensuring a thorough examination of the issues raised by the appellants.