1997 (4) TMI 168 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues: Classification of excisable goods under the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985; Revision of classification list retrospectively; Jurisdiction of proper officer to approve classification list; Appeal against approved classification list.

In this case, the appellants initially classified their products under sub-heading 7405.10 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, which was approved on 12-6-1986. However, the Indian Railways later advised them that the correct classification should be under Heading 74.13, sub-heading 7413.90. The appellants then submitted a revised classification list on 27-2-1987, seeking retrospective approval from 2-4-1986. The Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) rejected their appeal on the grounds that the revised classification was under a different sub-heading not subject to the impugned order, rendering the appeal infructuous.

The appellants argued that it was the Revenue's responsibility to correctly classify the goods and that their revised classification should have been approved from the initial effective date. They contended that no refund was involved, and the issue solely pertained to classification. The Advocate referred to the self-removal procedure rules, emphasizing the proper officer's authority to modify classifications after enquiry. The Respondent, however, maintained that the original classification had been approved and any challenge should have been raised within the prescribed time limit.

The Tribunal observed that the approved classification was not challenged within the limitation period, and no appeal was filed against it. The law mandates that any revision of an approved classification must adhere to the statute of limitation and can only be prospective. As the appellants sought revision for the year 1986-87 based on the 1987-88 classification, the appeal was deemed meritless. The Tribunal upheld the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals)' decision, finding no infirmity in his reasoning and ultimately rejected the appeal.

In conclusion, the Tribunal affirmed the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals)' decision, emphasizing the importance of adhering to the statutory limitation for challenging approved classifications and the prospective nature of any revisions. The appeal was dismissed due to the appellants' failure to challenge the original classification within the prescribed timeline and their attempt to seek retrospective revision based on a subsequent classification list.