2015 (11) TMI 833 - SC - Central Excise

Classification of motor vehicles hinges and handles - whether the goods are classifiable under Chapter Heading 8302.00 or Chapter Heading 8708.00 - Held that - the goods in question are meant for specific purpose viz. in the motor vehicles that too for specific model of the motor vehicles as its parts. - To determine the applicability of the item under particular head, the test of commercial identity of the goods would be the relevant test and not the functional test. It was also held that the expression parts of general use would not apply to parts or accessories which are not suitable for use solely or primarily with articles of Chapter Heading 87.08 which pertains to parts and accessories of motor vehicles of Chapter Headings 87.01 to 87.05. The Court was also categorical that in such a case the test that is to be applied is whether the goods are suitable for use solely or primarily with articles of Chapter Headings 87.01 to 87.05 . It is strange even when the judgment was specifically brought to the notice of the Tribunal and is taken note of, but the same was not dealt with by the Tribunal in the impugned judgment at all. - Decision in the case of G.S.Auto International Limited vs. CC Excise, Chandigarh 2003 (1) TMI 700 - SUPREME COURT followed - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
Classification of goods under Chapter Heading 8302.00 or Chapter Heading 8708.00.

The Supreme Court judgment dealt with the classification of goods, specifically motor vehicle hinges and handles, under Chapter Heading 8302.00 or Chapter Heading 8708.00. The appellant, an assessee, challenged the decision of the Commissioner classifying the goods under Chapter Heading 8302.00. The goods were manufactured based on specifications provided by motor vehicle manufacturers for specific use in motor vehicles. The Court analyzed the competing entries and noted that while Chapter Heading 8708.00 covered parts and accessories of motor vehicles, Chapter Heading 8302.00 dealt with furniture fittings. The Court emphasized that the goods in question, being specifically meant for motor vehicles, could not be considered accessories or fittings of furniture. The appellant's counsel highlighted the detailed specifications of the hinges and handles for motor vehicles, further supporting the argument for classification under Chapter Heading 8708.00.

The Court examined an Explanatory Note under Heading 83.02, which the Commissioner and Tribunal relied on to classify the goods under Chapter Heading 8302.00. However, the Court found that the Note referred to goods for general purposes, whereas the goods in question were specifically designed for use in motor vehicles. The Court cited a previous judgment emphasizing the test of commercial identity of goods for classification, rather than a functional test. The judgment clarified that parts or accessories not suitable for use solely or primarily with motor vehicles should not be classified under Chapter Heading 8708.00. Despite the appellant bringing this judgment to the notice of the Tribunal, it was not considered in the impugned decision. Consequently, the Court held that the judgment established the classification of the goods in favor of the appellant, setting aside the Tribunal's decision and allowing the appeal with no order as to costs.