1997 (7) TMI 235 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues: Proper classification of stationary tanks under Central Excise Tariff

Classification under sub-heading 8609.00 or 8312.90:
The appeal involved the classification of stationary tanks by M/s. Kosan Metal Products Pvt. Ltd. The appellants sought classification under sub-heading No. 8609.00, while the Department classified the tanks under sub-heading No. 8312.90. The Tribunal examined whether the tanks were suitable for carrying goods or meant for storage. The Tribunal found that the stationary tanks were designed for storage and stocking goods at one place, not for carrying goods. Therefore, classification under Heading 86.09 was deemed incorrect.

Classification under Heading 83.12:
The Tribunal analyzed the Central Excise Tariff under Heading No. 83.12, which covered containers of base metal. It was established that the stationary tanks, being containers of base metal, were correctly classifiable under sub-heading No. 8312.90. The Tribunal highlighted the specific criteria for classification under sub-headings 8312.11, 8312.12, and 8312.19, emphasizing that the tanks did not fall under these categories, leading to their classification under sub-heading No. 8312.90.

Comparison with Customs Co-operation Council Nomenclature:
The Tribunal referred to the Customs Co-operation Council Nomenclature and the alignment with the harmonized commodity description and coding system of nomenclature. It discussed the classification of containers of base metal under the previous tariff system and the changes introduced in the Central Excise Tariff. The Tribunal cited a previous case to support its classification decision, emphasizing the historical context of the tariff alignment.

Decision and Analysis:
The Tribunal upheld the decision of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay, regarding the correct classification of the goods under sub-heading No. 8312.90. It concluded that the stationary tanks were appropriately classified as containers of base metal, aligning with the Central Excise Tariff provisions. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the classification under sub-heading No. 8312.90 and rejecting the appellant's claim for classification under sub-heading No. 8609.00.