1997 (12) TMI 319 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Classification of 'Motor Starters' under the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985.

Detailed Analysis:

Issue 1: Classification Dispute
The dispute in this case revolves around the classification of 'Motor Starters' manufactured by the appellant. The appellant initially classified the product under Heading 85.37 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. However, the respondents contended that the motor starters should be classified under Heading No. 85.35 or 85.36 based on the voltage of the product.

Issue 2: Appellant's Argument
The appellant argued that the motor starters manufactured by them are a combination of switch gear products individually classifiable under Heading 85.36 of the tariff. They asserted that these apparatus were mounted on a base, making them eligible for classification under Heading No. 85.37 of the Tariff. The appellant relied on a previous Tribunal decision in the case of Crompton & Greaves Ltd. v. CCE to support their classification argument.

Issue 3: Legal Interpretation
The appellant emphasized that the classification should be determined solely based on the language used in the relevant tariff entry. They cited a decision by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Mahindra and Mahindra to support their stance that external meanings should not influence classification decisions.

Issue 4: Tribunal's Analysis
Upon reviewing the product literature and the nature of the motor starters, the Tribunal found that the product functions as an electric apparatus for switching electric circuits, protecting them, and making connections within electrical circuits. This functionality aligned with the descriptions under Heading Nos. 85.35 and 85.36 of the Central Excise Tariff Act.

Issue 5: Precedent and Rulings
The Tribunal differentiated the present case from the precedent cited by the appellant, emphasizing that the classification of motor starters differed from the products involved in previous decisions. Additionally, the Tribunal dismissed the relevance of policy content from tariff classification guidance by National Customs Rulings, Government of Canada, due to insufficient information provided by the appellant.

Issue 6: Final Decision
After considering the arguments and evidence presented, the Tribunal concluded that the motor starters manufactured by the appellant were correctly classifiable under Heading 85.35 or 85.36 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, depending on the voltage of the product. The Tribunal also acknowledged the appellant's objection to the reliance on external descriptions and computerized indices for classification.

Conclusion:
The appeal was ultimately dismissed by the Tribunal, affirming the classification of the motor starters under Heading 85.35 or 85.36 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, based on the product's voltage specifications.