2000 (7) TMI 557 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues involved: Classification of goods under different tariff headings, demand of duty, limitation period for issuing show-cause notice.

Classification of Goods: The appellants claimed classification under Chapter Heading 73 and Chapter 76 for iron and steel goods and aluminium goods respectively. However, the authorities classified the goods under Heading 86.07 as parts of railways. The Tribunal held that aluminium structures used in railway coaches are properly classifiable under Heading 86.07, not under Chapter 73 or Chapter 76 as claimed by the appellants.

Demand of Duty: A show-cause notice was issued raising a duty demand for a specific period. The appellants challenged the notice on grounds of limitation and merits. The authorities considered the assessments as provisional even without a specific order under Rule 9B, citing the Samrat International case. The appellants argued that the assessments cannot be deemed provisional without complying with Rule 9B, referencing the Universal Paper Mills case and the Costal Gases and Chemicals Ltd. case.

Limitation Period: The appellants contended that the demand was time-barred as the assessments were not provisional due to non-compliance with Rule 9B. The Department argued that assessments pending approval of classification lists are deemed provisional, citing the Serai Kella Glass Works Pvt. Ltd. case. The Tribunal, considering various judgments, including the Mardia Steel Ltd. case, held that in the absence of orders for provisional assessments under Rule 9B, the demand issued was clearly barred by limitation.

The Tribunal ultimately ruled in favor of the appellants, setting aside the impugned order on the point of time-bar and allowing the appeal with consequential relief.