9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (10) TMI 336X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 07.19 of the first schedule to the Customs Tariff Act as claimed by them or under sub-heading 8302.41 CTA as venetian blinds confirmed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), under the impugned order. 2. Shri K. Kumar, learned Advocate, alongwith Shri N.C. Sogani, learned Consultant, submitted that the Department has classified the impugned goods under sub-heading 8302.41 relying upon the decision in the case of Interarch Building Products (P) Ltd. v. Collector of Customs - 1993 (65) E.L.T. 80 (T); that the said decision is not applicable to the facts of the present matter; that the impugned goods, imported by the Appellants, are only aluminium coils alloy in a running length of 1000 Mts for use in the manufacture of venetian blinds ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the products therein were in the shape of a channel tapered at one end, having holes and fine cutting, besides being painted and contended that the goods were completely processed articles and there was no other process left to be worked on them except cutting them into required length. He also mentioned that merely because the aluminium strips in question are to be used in the manufacture of venetian blinds, these cannot be classified as venetian blinds or components for venetian blinds; that it is settled law that "end use" cannot be made the basis for deciding classification of a product under the Tariff. He relied upon the decision in Dunlop India Ltd. v. U.O.I., 1983 (13) E.L.T. 1566 (S.C.). He finally relied upon the Circular No. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... report recorded on the reverse side of the Bill of Entry according to which "The goods appear to be correctly classifiable under CTH 83.02 in accordance with decision of CEGAT 1993 (65) E.L.T. 80 (T)." He also mentioned that the Aluminium Strips imported by them are colour coated and not meant for any other use. In reply, the learned Advocate submitted that the expression "suitable for" has been used in relation to Words "base metal mountings, fittings and similar articles" and the coils imported by them cannot be classified under Heading 83.02 by giving an unlimited interpretation to the said expression; that this cannot be applied to each and every thing; that 'suitability' is to be judged in conjunction with the things mentioned in the h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r Heading 83.02 of the Tariff. As per Explanatory Notes of HSN, Heading 83.02 "covers general purpose classes of base metal accessory fittings and mountings, such as are used largely on furniture, doors, windows, coach work, etc. Goods within such general classes remain in this heading even if they are designed for particular uses (e.g., door handles or hinges for automobiles)." Further, the Explanatory Notes clarifies that "the heading does not, however, extend to goods forming an essential part of the structure of the article, such as windows frames, or switch devices for revolving chairs." It is thus evident that Aluminium coils cannot by itself be considered as mounting, fittings and similar articles suitable for blinds. Some of the exa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
