1998 (8) TMI 234 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues: Classification of textile machinery parts under Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985.

The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, MADRAS involved four appeals by Revenue against Order-in-Appeal Nos. 115/89 to 118/89, all dated 21-8-1989. The dispute revolved around the classification of textile machinery parts, including crank shafts, tappet shaft sets, gear wheels, pulleys and wheels, and picking shafts. The Collector (Appeals) had classified these items under Heading 84.46, applying the proviso to Note 2(b) to Section XVI of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985.

The main argument presented by the Revenue was that the items in question, being parts of textile machinery, should be classified under Heading 84.83 instead of Heading 84.46. The Revenue contended that since these parts were specifically described in Heading 84.83, they should be classified accordingly, as per interpretative Note 2(a) to Section XVI. The Revenue argued that the specific sub-heading should prevail over the classification of the main machine itself, as per Note 2(a).

The respondents, represented by an advocate, reiterated the impugned order, supporting the classification under Heading 84.46. After considering the arguments from both sides and reviewing the records, the Tribunal found that the items in dispute were indeed parts of looms and fell under the description of Heading 84.83, which covered transmission shafts, gears, pulleys, and related components. The Tribunal noted that each of the five items was specifically described under Heading 84.83.

The Tribunal referred to Note 2(a) to Section XVI, which stipulated that parts of machines falling under Chapter Heading 84.83 should be classified in their respective headings. Since the goods in question were included under Chapter Heading 84.83 and were not excluded under the note, the Tribunal concluded that all parts should be classified under this heading. Therefore, the reliance on Note 2(b) by the Collector (Appeals) was deemed misplaced, and the correct classification was determined to be under sub-heading 84.83.

In conclusion, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order-in-appeal and ruled in favor of the Revenue, determining that all five products should be correctly classified under sub-heading 84.83.