2000 (6) TMI 239 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues: Classification of Hammer Union, Chickson Pipes, and Swivel Joints under Central Excise Tariff Act

Issue Analysis:

1. Classification under Sub-heading 8479.10 or 8479.90:
The primary issue in this appeal was the classification of Hammer Union, Chickson Pipes, and Swivel Joints manufactured by M/s. Sara Services & Engg. Pvt. Ltd. The Commissioner (Appeals) had classified these items as parts under sub-heading 8479.90, while the Appellant argued that these items should be classified under sub-heading 8479.10 as individual machines. The Appellant contended that each item had a specific function and should be classified accordingly.

2. Appellant's Argument:
The Appellant's representative, a Chartered Accountant, argued that the impugned goods, namely Hammer Union, Chickson Pipes, and Swivel Joints, were individual machines and not parts. They emphasized that each item had a distinct function, such as providing hydraulic pressure, carrying fluids, or handling fluid circulation. The representative relied on Note 4 of Section XVI, stating that when individual components contribute to a clearly defined function, the entire assembly should be classified as a machine. The Appellant contended that the items were composite machines with integrated collections of objects, interacting in unison.

3. Respondent's Counter-argument:
The Departmental Representative argued against the classification of the impugned goods as individual machines, stating that these items were used as parts in larger machines and could not function independently. The Respondent contended that just because an item had a specific function did not make it a separate machine. They highlighted that Note 4 to Section XVI was not applicable to the classification of individual parts but to machines consisting of various components. The Respondent cited previous tribunal decisions to support their argument.

4. Judgment and Analysis:
The Tribunal considered both parties' submissions and examined the technical brochure provided by the Appellant. It was noted that the impugned goods were cleared as parts and not as standalone machines. Sub-heading 8479.10 covered machines with individual functions not specified elsewhere in Chapter 84. The Tribunal agreed with the Respondent that Note 4 to Section XVI was not relevant for classifying individual parts. Since the impugned goods were cleared as parts and not as a composite machine, they were classified under heading 8479.10. Consequently, the appeal was rejected.

In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the classification of Hammer Union, Chickson Pipes, and Swivel Joints as parts under sub-heading 8479.10 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, based on the specific functions they performed and their clearance as individual parts rather than composite machines.