TMI Blog2014 (6) TMI 383X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppellants for recovery of the differential duty due to wrong classification of the items mentioned in the said declaration within normal period as prescribed under Section 11A of Central Excise Act, 1944. There is no merit in the allegation of the Department that lesser duty had been paid by the Appellant resorting to suppression or mis-declaration of facts. - Following decision of Tata Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. Vs. Union of India & Others reported in [1988 (5) TMI 39 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] - demand beyond the normal period of limitation is not sustainable - Decided in favour of assessee. - Appeal No.474/06 - ORDER NO.FO/A/71122/2013 - Dated:- 5-9-2013 - DR. D.M.MISRA AND DR. I.P.LAL, JJ. For the Appellant: Shri S. P. Majumdar, Advocate For the Respondent: Shri S. P. Pal, Appraiser (A.R.) JUDGEMENT Per Dr. D. M. Misra : This appeal is filed against the Order-in-Original No. 17/Commr./CE/Kol.II/Denovo/Adjn./2006-07 dated 16.05.2006 passed by Commr. of Central Excise, Kol.-II 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the Appellants are engaged in the manufacture of Rolls, Pusher, Ejector, Speed Increaser, Roller Table, Cold Shear, Pinch Roll e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lete metal rolling mill and accordingly, these goods were cleared not in piecemeal of a metal rolling mill. The ld. Advocate also fairly contented that the Appellants, before this Tribunal, now choose not to seriously contest the classification of the said goods, as claimed earlier. But on behalf of the Appellant, he has vehemently argued that the demand is barred by limitation. The ld. Advocate submitted that on a bonafide belief that each of these machines being capable of and discharging its function independently and invariably beingused in rolling mills, therefore, filed declaration under Chapter sub-heading 8455.10 being All goods other than parts . The ld. Advocate further submitted that the same set of machines were also enclosed with their classification list prior to 16.03.1995 and duly approved by the Department. In support, he has placed before this Tribunal the approved classification list No.70/RE/HND/R-V/91-92 dt.17.09.1991. Hence, in his submission, the Department is fully aware of the fact that these goods were manufactured and cleared by them prior to 16.03.1995 under sub-heading 8455.00 of CETA, 1985. Thus, there is no mis-declaration, mis-statement of descrip ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... runout pusher, mill stand, cold mill stand, roller table, approach table, tilting table, twisting table, pinion stand, coiler, billet ejector, chain transfer, furnace run out table, recuperator, re-heating furnace, rotary shear, scrap shear, alligator shear, crop shear, billet shear, cold shear, cobble shear, straightening machine, hot shear, rolls (C.I. steel forged steel), Pinch rolls, pusher with drive, coil conveyor, flywheel assy., reduction gear box, speed increaser, repeaters etc. and the classification of these produces are declared under Chapter Sub-heading 8455.10 against the broad heading Metal Rolling Mills and Rolls there for as All goods other than parts . The Appellants had also declared in Annexure B, to the said declaration the parts as classifiable under Chapter sub-heading 8455.90. The dispute centered around classification of products mentioned at Annexure A as All goods other than parts falling under Chapter Sub-heading 8455.10. It is the Revenue s case that the said items being parts of Metal Rolling Mill and Rolls there for, hence, classifiable under Chapter Sub-heading 8455.90 attracting duty @ 15% Adv. It is not in dispute that the Appellants had ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t supplying the entire Rolling Mill. They are only providing mechanical plant and equipment covering handling and hoisting facilities, technological structures and special tackles, air-conditioning, ventilation and fire protection system, compressed air system, de-scaling system (parts), run out and interconnecting roller tables, coiler truck way, coil conveyor, oil, grease, lubricants upto commissioning. Rule 2(a) of Rules for Interpretation of the Schedule applies only when incomplete or unfinished goods have the essential character of the complete or finished goods. The Appellants have not adduced any material on record to prove that the goods supplied by them have the essential character of complete Rolling Mills. In view of this, the impugned goods cannot be treated as complete Rolling Mill for the purpose of classification under sub-heading 8455.10 of the Tariff. Accordingly the decision in the case of Flat Products Equipments (I) Ltd. would not be applicable to the facts of the present matter as in the said matter it was not in dispute that the parts when assembled constitute a complete rolling mill. There is no force also in the submissions of the learned Advocate that from ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n filed under Rule 173B of the erstwhile Central Excise Rules, 1944, and duly acknowledged by the Department. But, no action had been initiated against the Appellants for recovery of the differential duty due to wrong classification of the items mentioned in the said declaration within normal period as prescribed under Section 11A of Central Excise Act, 1944. The ld. Advocate has placed reliance on various judgements of the Hon ble Supreme Court and the Tribunal in support his argument that once there is no change in description of the goods and they have been declaring the items manufactured by them to the Department, then, there is no suppression of facts or any mis-declaration. We find that the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Tata Iron Steel Co. Ltd. Vs. Union of India Others reported in 1988 (35) ELT 605 (SC), more or less in similar circumstances, had observed as follows : 7. Regarding the question of limitation, the dispute is whether, assuming that the demand made by the Collector was valid, what is the period to which it could relate, it being common ground that as far as composite units comprising wheels, tyres and axles supplied by the appellant to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
