1996 (12) TMI 225 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues: Classification of emergency ventilator under Central Excise Tariff

In the present appeal before the Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, the main issue was whether the emergency ventilator, equipped with features like an exhaust fan and alarm bell, should be classified under Item No. 33(3) of the old Central Excise Tariff, which pertains to electric fans and regulators, or under Item No. 68 covering goods not elsewhere specified.

Analysis:

The Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) initially opined that the emergency ventilator, designed to provide fresh air and other functionalities such as displacing air, could be considered as performing the function of fans, thus falling under the category of electric fans not otherwise specified.

The appellants, M/s. Steelage Industries Ltd., contended that their emergency ventilator, incorporating an exhaust fan and alarm bell, was specifically designed for bank lockers to provide fresh air, light, and security features like oral communication and food passage. They argued that such a unique product should be classified under Item No. 68 of the old Central Excise Tariff, covering goods not specifically categorized elsewhere.

During the hearing, the Respondent's representative, Shri M. Jayaraman, asserted that the primary function of the emergency ventilator was to provide air to individuals inside the room where it was installed, thus justifying its classification as an electric fan not otherwise specified.

Upon careful consideration, the Tribunal noted that the appellants did not engage in the manufacture of exhaust fans and that their product, the emergency ventilator, went beyond a typical electric fan by incorporating additional features like an alarm bell and communication capabilities for individuals trapped inside bank vaults. The Tribunal emphasized that not every device providing or displacing air could be classified as an electric fan under the Central Excise Tariff.

Referring to a previous case, Stormac India Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, where a similar issue arose regarding the classification of an electric blower/fan, the Tribunal highlighted that the device in question did not function independently as a fan and was not marketable as such, leading to a distinct classification.

Ultimately, considering all relevant facts and circumstances, the Tribunal ruled in favor of M/s. Steelage Industries Ltd., classifying their emergency ventilator, constructed from a duty-paid exhaust fan, under Item No. 68 of the old Central Excise Tariff. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the decision was made accordingly.