2000 (2) TMI 590 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues Involved: Classification of Thermit Portion - Heading 38.10 vs. sub-heading No. 7302.90.

Analysis:
1. The main issue in this appeal was the classification of Thermit Portion manufactured by a company. The Revenue contended that the product should be classified under Heading 38.10 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, while the Commissioner (Appeals) had classified it under sub-heading No. 7302.90.

2. The Revenue argued that the product, used for joining rails, contained aluminium powder with metallic oxides, including iron oxide. They asserted that iron oxide should not be considered a base metal and, based on the composition and intended use, the product fell under Heading 38.10, covering various preparations for metal surfaces and welding materials.

3. On the other hand, the Respondents argued that the product, designed for rail jointing, should be classified under Heading 73.02, which specifically included materials for fixing rails. They emphasized that the classification should be based on the product's function rather than the title of the chapter.

4. The Tribunal examined the contentions of both parties and compared the relevant headings. It noted that the Thermit Portion contained iron oxide, which is not a metal. Referring to the Chemical Dictionary and the Explanatory Notes of the Harmonized System of Nomenclature (H.S.N.), the Tribunal concluded that the product did not qualify as an article of iron or steel under Heading 73.02. Therefore, it held that the Thermit Portion should be classified under Heading 38.10, as argued by the Revenue.

5. The Tribunal's decision was based on the specific composition of the product, the definitions of iron oxide, and the requirements outlined in the respective headings of the Central Excise Tariff Act. As a result, the appeal of the Revenue was allowed, and the classification of the Thermit Portion under Heading 38.10 was upheld.