9911796707
TMI Blog1993 (9) TMI 181X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l - of Iron (un-machined) . The said product was approved and Rule 98 procedure of Central Excise Rules, 1944 was resorted to as further verification and investigations in the matter was required. The assessee (appellant) claimed the classification of the said products under sub-heading No. 7325.10 with exemption under Notification No. 275/88-C.E., dated 4-11-1988. The present Asstt. Collector, Central Excise, Dhanbad vide his Order-in-Original No. 120/93-C.E., dated 1-3-1993, approved the impugned product under Chapters 84, 85, 86 87 etc. and denied the eligibility of the exemption under Notification No. 275/88-C.E., dated 4-11-1988 and spoke out that the proper application of exemption benefit would be the Notification No. 223/88-C.E., ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t for by the appellant was accepted. The issue in question is not a new one and the department had along been aware of the same. The decisions of both Tribunal and Appellate Collector have been accepted by the department and appellant. The Order of the Collector (Appeals) shows that the said Collector specifically rejected the findings of the Assistant Collector that the said goods were classifiable under Chapters 84, 85, 86 87 of the schedule to the Tariff Act. This decision has been accepted by the department. Further it is evident from the Circular of the Board dated 1-8-1989, specifically clarifying that iron castings and cast articles of iron which are unmachined and are not subject to any machining other than fettling would be eligi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e as iron castings under Chapter 73 and not as machine parts. In order to bring uniformity in assessment the Board issued directions under Section 37B of the Central Excises Salt Act. About binding effect of these directions on subordinate officers the Gujarat High Court as well as the Calcutta High Court have given decisions, reported in 1991 (51) E.L.T. 265 (Guj.) 1992 (57) E.L.T. 674 (Cal.). Although res judicata does not apply to tax matters, the assessees must know where they stand and department cannot go on revising classification every now and then if there is no change in the processes employed in the manufacture of goods over the years. In the instant case, the Asstt. Collector has just done that. 4. He has, therefore, praye ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re installed subsequently. According to the assessee, annealing was always being done in a heat chamber and surface coating by dipping the castings manually in paint. Thus there has been no sophisticated machine for the two operations. That apart it has been clarified by the Central Board of Excise Customs after full alignment of the Central Excise Tariff with HSN from 1-3-1988 that the six processes viz. (i) removal of surface defects, (ii) surface cleaning and removal of surface defects, (iii) chipping, filing or grinding to remove excess material, (iv) annealing and stress relieving, (v) proof machining and (vi) surface coating alone which do not alter the essential character of the castings would not be enough to merit classification ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
