9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (12) TMI 124X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... S/WS and the entire system, on which duty already stands paid by the manufacturer of such OFS/WS, is only erected and installed by them at site of customers, from whom they have procured the orders. Thus, it is appellant's contention that mere assembling and installation of OFS/WS already manufactured and cleared by respective manufacturers will not once again result in manufacture of furniture classifiable under chapter 94 and, as such, no duty can again be confirmed against them. 3. It is the appellant's contention that after receiving the orders from their customers, the entire lay out is drawn, which is given to a team of engineers who operate on computer aided design system. On the said system lay out are prepared where ready-made furniture systems and work stations manufactured by independent manufactures, like Kemps Co. Godrej, Voltas, Alwyn, etc. are superimposed. After settling with the client about number of work stations and other furniture items and the cost of the same, orders are placed upon the manufacturer of the furniture for each works station, which has a predetermined number of elements, pre-determined sizes and shapes. After procuring the various elements o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he goods in question are specifically and solely designed as parts or elements of the total furniture systems, they will be appropriately classifiable in the heading in which the system is classified. As can be seen from their Literature as discussed earlier, the Noticee themselves calls it as furniture system. I also find that these partitions which are a part of total system cannot be considered in isolation as they are designed in such a way that a number of other items of furniture can able attached to it by means of nut and bolts which together constitute a work station which is nothing but a furniture system. In such a system partition provides separate compartments in a office hall, attached to these partitions are table tops mounted on angles brackets and cantilever table brackets, the partition also can accommodate electric switches and other items meant for such purpose. Further file racks, drawers, overhead bins, accessory rails are also attached to it which together constitute a item 'furniture'. Even if the partitions are used merely as a wall for a compartment it is covered by the definition of 'furniture' given in the HSN explanatory notes. These partitions are d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... king both the show cause notices for decision. Therefore, considering all the facts discussed herein above, law laid down by Supreme Court and interpretation of the term "furniture" and "parts" in the context of chapter note (2) of chapter 94 and corresponding explanatory notes in HSN, I hold that the goods in question are appropriately classifiable in the Chapter sub-heading 9403.00 as "other furnitures and parts thereof."" The above order of the Assistant Commissioner was accepted by Kemp Co., who started clearing the goods as other furniture and discharging duty liability under sub-heading 9403.00. It has been contended before us that M/s. Kemp Co. not only complied with the above order for future clearance but also paid duty for the past clearance made from 1st August 1996 onwards and paid the differential duty of Rs. 75.50 lakhs. As such, it is the appellant's submission that the entire goods having paid duty as OFS, cannot be again taxed to duty for the second time under heading 9403.00, as OFS. 5.It has also been contended before us by the ld. Advocate that the same activity of assembly could not be regarded as an activity of manufacture. The view taken by the reve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dently to circumvent tax on the value addition on account of various processes carried out such as, assembly of frames and tops, securing storage positions, cutting, trimming and filing of frames, tables and tiles, fixing shade variations and so on. 8.The Commissioner has also observed that as far as M/s. Kemp Co., is concerned, it is immaterial for them as to whether they cleared the goods as parts/components or complete furniture system as both attract the same rate of duty. He also made reference to the Tribunal's order in the case of Space Age Engineering Projects (P) Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, Pune, reported in 1995 (78) E.L.T. 544 (Tri.) wherein it was held that the criteria for classification of goods was the form in which the goods where removed from the factory. As such, he has held that inasmuch as the goods were not removed from the factory of Kemp Co. in fully assembled furniture system, they have to be treated as parts and not OFS. 9.While considering the issue as to whether process of assembly on parts/components would amount to manufacture or not, Commissioner has detailed the nature of work done at site and the process of installation as un ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of furniture, is an attempt to wilfully misstate the relevant facts with an intention to evade duty. 13.We have considered the submissions made by both sides and have gone through the impugned orders passed by the Commissioner. The question required to be decided by us is as to whether the appellants are to pay duty on the activity of assembling and installing furniture at their customer's premises out of the various components of OFS/WS. We take note that the Assistant Commissioner having jurisdiction over the factory of Kemp Co. had classified the goods under heading 9403.00, which covers furniture system. As such, it become clear that what has been manufactured and cleared at the manufacture's end was furniture and not parts of the furniture. It has been shown to us by the appellants that a purchase order by a particular customer carries one project code consisting of various components required for the erection of OFS/WS. All the components cleared by the manufactures has a cross reference to such project code. The appellants are simply required to assemble the various components at the customer's premises in fulfilment of the orders placed by them. As detailed in the impug ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... missioner of Central Excise, Calcutta-III, reported in 2001 (133) E.L.T. 405 (Tri - Kolkata) as also in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi-III v. B.H.P. Engineers, reported in 2000 (119) E.L.T. 599 (Tri.) had held that the goods cleared as part shipment of the conveyor for the purpose of convenience of transportation to be assembled at site has to be held as clearance of a complete conveyor system and not parts. By applying the ratio of the above decision, the reasoning of the adjudicating authority that since the goods were cleared as components from the manufacture's factory and not completely assembled as OFS, the same has to be held as clearance of parts, does not appeal to us. It is a well settled law that the clearance in parts or in components in unassembled condition for the ease of transportation has to be held as clearance of a complete system, whatever it may be. As such, clearance from the factory of Kemp Co. has to be equated with clearance of a complete OFS or WS and not as parts. Once it is held so, no further duty is required to be paid by the appellants at the time of erection of the same at site. 15.We also feel convinced with the appellant's ar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
