1988 (9) TMI 237 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
Classification of goods under Tariff Item 23A CET - whether it covers fused quartz and fused silica.

Detailed Analysis:

Issue 1: Classification under Tariff Item 23A CET
The issue in this appeal revolves around the classification of goods imported by the respondents, described as "quartz cups," under Tariff Item 23A CET for the levy of Additional Duty (CVD). The Assistant Collector initially rejected the refund claim, considering the Glossary of terms relating to Glass and Glass-ware and ASTM C-162-80 definitions, which led her to conclude that "quartz cups" fell under the standard definition of glass. However, the Collector of Customs (Appeals) set aside this decision, emphasizing that the absence of a specific note in CET regarding fused quartz or fused silica meant they were not ordinarily considered as glass under Item 23A. The appellant argued that quartz cups were a form of glass as per Indian Standards Institution Specifications and should be classified under Item 23A(4) CET.

Issue 2: Interpretation of Glass and Function of Goods
The Departmental Representative contended that quartz cups and silicon-crucibles were forms of glass, citing the definition of glass as an inorganic product of fusion. On the other hand, the respondents' advocate argued that the primary function of the goods, used in furnaces for manufacturing synthetic gems, should determine their classification. He referenced a Supreme Court judgment emphasizing that goods should be classified based on their known use and functions. The advocate highlighted that while technically quartz cups could be considered glass, their melting point and function differentiated them from traditional glass, making them correctly assessable under Tariff 68 rather than 23A(4).

Issue 3: Application of Precedent and Expert Opinions
The Tribunal considered a previous order regarding the classification of quartz cups, acknowledging that the lack of evidence argument against the earlier decision was unsubstantiated. The Tribunal also evaluated the definitions of glass provided by the Indian Standards Institution and ASTM, emphasizing the Supreme Court's directive to classify goods based on their known functions and use. The Tribunal concluded that the absence of Indian Standards and ASTM definitions in the earlier order did not diminish its value, especially considering the careful consideration given to the matter. The Tribunal upheld the earlier decision, dismissing the current appeal based on the classification of quartz cups as glass under Tariff Item 23A CET.

In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal, affirming the classification of quartz cups as glass under Tariff Item 23A CET based on the known functions and use of the goods, as well as the precedent set by previous decisions and expert opinions.