2000 (1) TMI 549

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... appeal filed by the Revenue, the matter relates to the classification of the circular blades, bias cutting blades, and top and bottom cutting blades. There were some other items also in respect of which the classification was challenged in the show cause notice, dated 14-1-1992, but the present appeal filed by the Revenue do not refer to those items. The appellants were classifying these goods un .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ng No. 82.02 was not appropriate. 2. The respondents have prayed for decision on merits. 3. We have heard Shri Satnam Singh, SDR, and have gone through the facts on record. We find that the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) without discussing different items which were the subject matter of the show cause notice had taken a general view that Heading No. 82.02 was more specific for .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ines. As the cutting blades which are in dispute were not usable with the saws, we consider that their classification under Heading No. 82.02 was not appropriate. After taking into account the product description and the description in the Tariff, we agree with the Revenue that these three types of blades were correctly classifiable under Heading No. 82.08 of the Tariff. The impugned Order-in-Appe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X