2000 (8) TMI 567 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues involved: Classification of plastic hoses manufactured by M/s. Eureka Forbes Ltd. under Heading 39.17 or Heading No. 85.09 of the Central Excise Tariff Act.

Appellant's Arguments:
The Appellants argued that the vacuum hoses are an integral part of the Vacuum Cleaner, specially designed for use only with the vacuum cleaner, and not items of general use. They relied on various legal precedents and Section Notes for classification. They emphasized that the hoses are classifiable under Heading 85.09 by virtue of being specifically made for use only with vacuum cleaners.

Department's Arguments:
The Department contended that the Appellants classified the hoses under different headings at different times, indicating an intention to evade duty. They argued that the hoses are finished goods by themselves, mentioned in Heading 39.17, and can be used with other products, thus should be classified under Heading 39.17.

Judgment:
The Tribunal analyzed the definitions of 'Parts of General use' and 'tubes, pipes & hoses' as per the Tariff. They noted that the hoses in question are not pipe or tube fittings and do not fall under 'Parts of general use.' The Tribunal highlighted the burden of proof on the Department for classification. They found that the hoses were designed solely for use with Vacuum Cleaners and not capable of general use for conveying gases or liquids, thus appropriately classifiable under Heading 85.09.

The Tribunal also considered the rules for classification of parts of machines, noting that parts suitable for use solely or principally with a particular machine are classified with the machine. Citing legal precedents and Board's Circulars, the Tribunal held that the hoses in question are appropriately classifiable along with the vacuum cleaner under Heading No. 85.09. They further ruled out imposing penalties or charging interest due to the classification change by the Appellants, as the appeal was allowed on merit.