2010 (3) TMI 425 - AT - Central Excise

Adhesive- . The issue arising for consideration pertains to classification of three products namely Emdilith Mahacol and Emditex. The lower appellate authority has classified all these products for the periods covered by the relevant classification declarations (Nos. 5/2000-01 dated 13-10-2000 6/2000-01 dated 16-11-2000 7/2000-01 dated 27-11-2000 8/2000-01 dated 23-1-2001 and 9/2000-01 dated 19-3-2001) under SH 3905.10 of the CETA Schedule as claimed by the assessee. According to the Revenue the first two products are classifiable under SH 3506.00 as decided by the original authority. Hence the present appeal. Held that- The classification of Emdilith and Mahacol under SH 3506.00 originally decided by the Assistant Collector in 1991 was sustained by the Collector (Appeals) in 1992. Both the authorities duly took into account the report of the Deputy Chief Chemist. The classification was never challenged by the assessee. In the circumstances the subsequent classification declarations filed by the assessee ought to have been disposed of in the light of the appellate Collector s order of 1992. As rightly pointed out by the appellant it was not open to the Commissioner (Appeals) to reopen the classification of the two products which was settled long ago. Appeal is allowed.

Summary

Issues: Classification of products Emdilith, Mahacol, and Emditex under SH 3905.10 and SH 3506.00.

Analysis:
1. Classification of Emdilith, Mahacol, and Emditex: The appeal filed by the Revenue concerns the classification of three products under SH 3905.10 and SH 3506.00. The lower appellate authority had classified all products under SH 3905.10 as claimed by the assessee, while the Revenue argued for classification under SH 3506.00. The history of the case reveals that the original authority classified the first two products under SH 3506.00 and the third under SH 3905.10 in 1991, a decision upheld by the Collector (Appeals) in 1992. The classification stood final, unchallenged by the assessee or the Revenue. Subsequent provisional assessments and disputes were settled under the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme based on the original classification. The Deputy Commissioner later reclassified the products, leading to an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) against the classification of Emdilith and Mahacol under SH 3506.00.

2. Legal Arguments: The Revenue contended that the classification of Emdilith and Mahacol was finalized in 1992 and could not be reopened by the lower appellate authority. They argued that the decision of the Collector (Appeals) in 1992, based on the Deputy Chief Chemist's report, was binding and final. The Revenue highlighted that the assessee had accepted the classification under SH 3506.00 for Emdilith and Mahacol, settling the dispute accordingly. The appellate authority was criticized for overlooking the settled classification and reopening the issue.

3. Judgment: The Tribunal found merit in the Revenue's arguments, setting aside the lower appellate authority's decision on the classification of Emdilith and Mahacol. The original classification from 1991, upheld in 1992, remained valid as there were no changes in manufacturing methods or tariff entries since then. The Tribunal emphasized that the Commissioner (Appeals) had no authority to revisit the settled classification of the products. Therefore, the appeal by the Revenue was allowed, overturning the lower appellate authority's decision on the classification of Emdilith and Mahacol under SH 3506.00.