1998 (10) TMI 151 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues: Classification of dual-desk made of wood under Tariff Headings 94.01 and 94.03

Analysis:
1. The issue in this matter pertains to the classification of a dual-desk made of wood, consisting of seating arrangement and desk joined by steel pipes. Initially, the goods were classified under Tariff Heading 9403.00. However, later, the Revenue contended that the product should be classified under Tariff Heading 94.01 as it primarily serves as seats for school children. A show cause notice was issued for recovery of duty, which was confirmed by lower authorities based on classification and time bar objections.

2. The appellant argued that the product cannot be solely considered a 'seat' as it includes a desk, falling under Tariff Heading 94.03. Referred to as a 'dual-desk' in trade, the essential character is imparted by the desk component. The advocate highlighted Rule 3 of the "Rules for Interpreting Central Excise Tariff," suggesting that if classification is ambiguous, the later heading should prevail. Therefore, the dual-desk should be classified under Tariff Heading 94.03, and no additional duty is payable as per Notification No. 261/86-C.E.

3. On the contrary, the Revenue argued that the principal function of the product is for seating, making it classifiable under Tariff Heading 94.01. The product primarily serves as seats for school children, justifying its classification under this heading.

4. The Tribunal considered both arguments and observed that the product is a composite item, comprising both a bench and a desk. As it is neither purely a seat nor solely a desk, the essential character is derived from both components. Therefore, applying Rule 3 of the Central Excise Tariff Interpretation Rules, the Tribunal concluded that the dual-desk should be classified under Tariff Heading 94.03. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, the impugned order was set aside, and the appellant was granted relief based on the revised classification.