1999 (6) TMI 254 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Classification of articles manufactured by the respondent under different headings - 8537.00, 8543.00, and 8504.00.

Analysis:
The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, Mumbai centered around the classification of thirteen articles manufactured by the respondent under different headings. Initially, the goods were classified under heading 8537.00 and 8543.00 by the manufacturer, which was later changed to 8504.00 by the assessee. The department disputed this reclassification, leading to the current appeal.

The departmental representative argued that the goods were composite in nature, integrating elements that control the machinery they are attached to, suggesting a classification under Heading 85.37 or 85.43. However, the Collector (Appeals) upheld the classification under 8504.00 as correct, emphasizing the function of each article as static converters converting Alternating Current to Direct Current.

Heading 85.04 pertains to electrical transformers, static converters, and inductors, while Heading 85.37 and 85.43 deal with boards, panels, consoles equipped with apparatus for electric control or distribution, and electrical machines with individual functions, respectively. The Collector (Appeals) extensively analyzed the functions of the goods and concluded that they were static converters, with the presence of additional features not altering their primary function of electricity conversion.

Specifically, in the case of Simoreg K, the apparatus included features for monitoring the connected electrical motor, such as switching off power supply if motor speed exceeded or if temperature was excessive. However, these control functions were deemed subsidiary to the primary function of static conversion, leading to the affirmation of classification under 8504.00.

The Collector (Appeals) based his decision on careful reasoning and technical evidence from reputable institutions, such as the Victoria Jubilee Technical Institute and the Department of Electronics of the Government of India. The lack of compelling reasoning or technical evidence in the department's appeal led the Tribunal to dismiss the appeal, upholding the classification under 8504.00.