9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Classification of goods under Tariff Heading 87.05 or 84.26 based on the description of a crane with a capacity of 90 tonnes. Analysis: The appeal concerns the classification of imported goods described as a crane with a capacity of 90 tonnes. The lower appellate authority classified the goods under Tariff Heading 87.05, while the appellants argued for classification under Tariff Heading 84.26. The appellants contended that the crane is a special purpose crane with a telescopic boom designed for raising heavy loads to great heights, specifically for installing Wind Mills. They emphasized that the crane is mounted on a specially designed chassis with 16 wheels for specific installation purposes, not as a lorry. The appellants argued that Tariff Heading 84.26 is specific to cranes and work trucks fitted with cranes, which covers their equipment. They challenged the lower authority's interpretation of the Harmonized System of Nomenclature (HSN) Notes, particularly Chapter Note (2) to Chapter 84.26, which refers to machines mounted on automobile chassis or lorries. The appellants further cited a judgment of the Bombay High Court in a similar context, emphasizing that the crane imported does not fall under the category of ordinary cranes or light breakdown cranes mentioned in Chapter Note (2) to Chapter 84.26. They highlighted that the crane's capacity of 90 tonnes and specialized design for heavy lifting differentiate it from ordinary cranes, supporting their argument for classification under Tariff Heading 84.26. The Bombay High Court's judgment analyzed the consignment based on materials-handling equipment classifications, concluding that the consignment falls under Heading 84.22, which includes cranes and transporter cranes. On the other hand, the department's representative argued that the HSN Notes should guide the assessment of goods, asserting that the appellants' goods should be classified under Tariff Heading 87.05 according to Chapter Note (2) to Chapter 84.26. However, the Tribunal observed that a 90-tonne crane designed for lifting heavy loads to great heights cannot be considered an ordinary crane falling under Tariff Heading 87.05. The Tribunal noted the specialized design and capabilities of the crane, such as the collapsible boom and 16-wheel chassis, which are not typical of ordinary cranes used in daily operations. Based on the analysis of the arguments and the goods' characteristics, the Tribunal held that the goods do not align with the items covered under Tariff Heading 87.05 as per the HSN Notes. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the appellants' plea for classification under Tariff Heading 84.26, drawing support from the Bombay High Court's judgment on a similar matter. The final order directed the classification of the goods under Tariff Heading 84.26 with corresponding relief granted to the appellants.
|
