9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (10) TMI 339X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the subject of classification of iron and steel castings refers to the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Shivaji Works Ltd. [1993 (5) TMI 98 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI] and states that the castings coming out of casting moulds up to the stage of proof machining and requiring further machining before being used as machine parts would be classifiable under chapter 73 - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - E/485-486/2003-DB - Final Order No. 21806 - 21807 / 2017 - Dated:- 30-8-2017 - Shri S. S. Garg, Judicial Member And Shri Ashok K. Arya, Technical Member Mrs. M. Fathima Advocate For the Appellant Mr. Pakshirajan, AR For the Respondent ORDER Per : Ashok K. Arya M/s. Ashoka Bearing Housing Pvt. Ltd. has f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onsequent to above Final Order, the de novo order dated 23.11.2001 was passed by the Additional Commissioner holding that the process carried out by the appellant amounts to manufacture and item is classifiable under Chapter Heading 84.83 only; and exemption under Notification No.223/1988 is not available. However, this order dropped the proceedings against the appellant on invocation of extended period of limitation. (vii) In the meanwhile, the appellant was issued periodical show-cause notices demanding duty for the period 1.4.1994 dated 31.3.2001. These show-cause notices were decided by Order-in-Original dated 13.3.2002/8.5.2002 holding that the process undertaken by the appellant-assessee amounts to manufacture; therefore, confirm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Tribunal in the case of Shivaji Works Ltd. vs. CCE: 1994 (69) ELT 694 (Tri.) has observed as under: 9.4 Lower authorities have relied on Rule 2(a) of Interpretative Rules to arrive at the finding that the castings in question are parts of machine or parts of motor vehicle. We shall now examine and analyse the wording of Rule 2(a) whether such a result is possible. Rule 2(a) has already been extracted in para 5 above. It states that any reference in a heading to goods shall be taken to include a reference to those goods incomplete or unfinished, provided that the incomplete or unfinished goods have the essential character of the complete or finished goods. In other words, taking the example of the concerned Heading 73.25, reference to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ducts under Chapters 84, 85 or 87, such castings should be deprived of their most appropriate and only classification. Such an interpretation of Rule 2(a) is untenable. It will create clashes within different headings and disturb their harmony. 6.1 Further, CBEC in its Circular No.225/59/96/CX. Dated 1.7.96 issued on the subject of classification of iron and steel castings refers to above decision of the Tribunal in the case of Shivaji Works Ltd. (supra) and states that the castings coming out of casting moulds up to the stage of proof machining and requiring further machining before being used as machine parts would be classifiable under chapter 73. The relevant parts of the Circular dated 1.7.1996 are reproduced herein below: 2. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
