Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2019 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (7) TMI 198 - AT - Central ExciseClassification of goods - PVC Suction Pipes, PVC Krishi Pipes, PVC Water Hose Pipe, PVC Water Stop, Rubber Hose and Rubber Sheet - whether classified under chapter 3917 or otherwise? - extended period of limitation - HELD THAT:- The products in question are PVC Krishi Pipes of the burst pressure of 1.0 Mpa, PVC suction pipes of burst pressure of 1.5 Mpa and PVC Garden Pipe of 0.7 Mpa. Thus the products have the pressure of much less than 27.6 Mpa as is minimum required under chapter 3917.31. This particular observation is sufficient for us to hold that the product cannot be classified under section 3917.31. Thus, the products being one or the other kind of pipe that have been classified under section 39 in the category of 3917.39. All flexible or non-flexible tubes, pipes and hoses are excisable goods even if they are classified under chapter heading 3917.31 having work pressure of more than 27.6 Mpa and are also excisable and the duty of 16% is to be levied as per Central Excise Act. These observations coupled with the admission of the appellant that the product is classifiable are sufficient for us to hold that except for the burst pressure criteria, any pipe, tube or hose is excisable goods. The burst pressure of appellant’s product is admittedly less than 27.6 Mpa as is minimum required to claim exemption. None of the grounds of the appellant assessee as mentioned above affect the said excisability. Resultantly, we do not find any infirmity in the order denying the classification of the impugned goods under 3917.31 and holding it as a product classifiable under 3917.39 i.e. the hollow pipes which do not find any other classification in the said chapter, the demand confirmed is, therefore, sustainable. Extended period of limitation - Penalty - HELD THAT:- Since the appellant is found to have wrongly classified his product to such a category to which no duty is leviable, the goods are otherwise excisable, the act is held as wilful intention to evade the duty - The said act of the appellant is definitely an act of misrepresentation of the facts - adjudicating authority was right to invoke the extended period of limitation and the penalties are also held to have been rightly imposed. Appeal dismissed.
|