1997 (7) TMI 236 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues: Classification of Display Equipment under Central Excise Tariff - Heading No. 90.13 vs. Heading No. 90.09; Exemption under Notification No. 175/86-C.E.

In the present case, the main issue before the Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, New Delhi was the classification of the product known as 'Display Equipment' under the Central Excise Tariff. The initial classification by the respondents placed the Display Equipment under Heading No. 90.13, while the Revenue contended that it should be classified under Heading No. 90.09 as parts of a photocopying machine. The Asstt. Collector of Central Excise, Bombay, had classified all six products, including the Display Equipment, under Heading No. 90.09. However, the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay, accepted the contention that the Display Equipment should be classified under Heading No. 90.13. The issue also involved the denial of exemption under Notification No. 175/86-C.E., dated 1-3-1986.

In the appeal, the Revenue argued that the Display Equipment was specifically designed to suit a photocopying machine and should be classified under Heading No. 90.09. They contended that the Display Equipment formed part of the display screen for the photocopying machine, converting electrical signals into visually meaningful symbols. The Revenue's position was based on the specific design and use of the product in question.

During the hearing, the appellants/Revenue were represented, while the respondents sought a decision on the merits of the case. The Revenue, through Shri M. Jayaraman, JDR, referred to the show cause notice and the order of the Asstt. Collector Central Excise, arguing that the classification under Heading No. 90.09 was correct based on the nature of the goods as parts of a photocopying machine.

The Tribunal carefully considered the matter and focused on the classification of the Display Equipment under Heading No. 90.13. The respondents argued that the Display Equipment should be classified under this heading as it covered devices converting electrical signals into visually meaningful symbols for various uses. They emphasized the independent function and wide applicability of the Display Equipment, supporting their classification choice with technical expertise.

The Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Bombay, upheld the classification under Heading No. 90.13 for the Display Equipment, highlighting its function of providing large or meaningful indications of inputs through visual symbols. The Collector's decision was based on the Explanatory Notes under Heading 90.13, supporting the contention that the Display Equipment fell under this category.

Ultimately, the Tribunal found no grounds to differ with the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals)'s decision regarding the classification of the Display Equipment. Considering all relevant facts and circumstances, the appeal filed by the Revenue was rejected, affirming the classification of the Display Equipment under Heading No. 90.13 of the Central Excise Tariff.