1996 (10) TMI 287 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues: Classification of goods "rotors and stators" under Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and eligibility for exemption under Notification No. 65/86-C.E.

Classification of Goods:
The appeal pertained to the classification of goods "rotors and stators" manufactured by M/s. Chitra Indus. The issue was whether these goods should be classified under Heading No. 85.03 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, as parts suitable for use with electric motors, or if they could be exempted under Notification No. 65/86-C.E. The Asstt. Collector of Central Excise, Coimbatore, classified the goods under Heading No. 85.03, considering them as parts of electric motors, thus denying the exemption. However, the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Madras, upheld this classification, emphasizing that no duty was payable on electric motors after duty on rotors and stators had been paid.

Judicial Precedents and Interpretation:
The Tribunal referred to a previous decision in the case of CCE, Ahmedabad v. M/s. Jyoti Electrical Motor Ltd., where it was held that rotors and stators specifically produced for power-driven pumps should be classified under Heading No. 85.03. The Tribunal disagreed with the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) and affirmed this classification, stating that even if the goods were designed for power-driven pumps, they should be classified as parts suitable for use with electric motors. Additionally, the Tribunal cited a judgment by the Gujarat High Court and a decision by the Supreme Court regarding the classification and clearance of goods under the Central Excise Tariff Act.

Exemption and Captive Consumption:
The Tribunal also discussed the implications of captive consumption and the applicability of Notification No. 80/80-C.E. regarding clearances of inputs. It was argued that the rotors and stators, being integral components of monoblock pumps, should fall under the same Tariff Item as the pumps. However, the Tribunal rejected this argument, stating that the goods manufactured were electric motors and not rotors and stators, thereby disentitling the appellant to the concession under the notification.

Decision and Conclusion:
The Tribunal upheld the classification of rotors and stators under Heading No. 85.03, confirming the decision of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals). It rejected the Revenue's appeal, stating that no electric motor comes into existence during the manufacture of monoblock pump sets. The Tribunal found no merit in the Revenue's arguments and dismissed the appeal.

In conclusion, the Tribunal's decision clarified the classification of goods "rotors and stators" under the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, emphasizing their categorization as parts suitable for use with electric motors under Heading No. 85.03. The judgment also highlighted the significance of judicial precedents, interpretation of tariff entries, and the implications of captive consumption in determining the eligibility for exemptions and concessions under relevant notifications.