Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1983 (3) TMI 291

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ls falling under Tariff Item 51-A as per Finance Act, 1977, the Company filed a classification list for the tools they were manufacturing. However, it excluded the extrusion punches from their classification list No. 1/77 on the ground that they would not fall under any of the sub-items mentioned in Tariff Item 51-A. The Company s case was that Can Extrusion Punches manufactured by it were part of the equipment Can Extruder by which zinc callot was made into a Can and that these could not by themselves be construed as extrusion dies for metals. The Company also pleaded that the extrusion dies for metals would cover only those used for extrusion of bar stock angle iron. When the Excise Authorities insisted upon the excisability of punches manufactured by the Company, a letter was filed along with a classification list No. 2/77 both dated 22nd August 1977, under protest. 3. The Company was served with a Show Cause Notice dated 26th of June 1978 for classification of Extrusion Punches manufactured by it under Tariff Item No. 51-A(iii). The Company replied to the Show Cause Notice on 15th of July 1978 and though resisted the classification of Extrusion Punches under Tariff Item 51 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ing machine - a manufacturing equipment for the mass production of dry battery zinc cans. 6. For the Revenue, Shri K.D. Tayal, Sr. D.R. with equal force pleaded that it was entirely wrong for the appellant s representative even to urge that Extrusion Punches could not be termed as a tool. According to Shri Tayal, machines producing battery can should be held to be machine tool and for his submission he placed reliance on Brussels Tariff Nomenclature Chapter 84.45. 7. To understand the respective view points of the parties, we advert to Tariff Item No. 51A and closely bring in focus its wordings and for that purpose the description is reproduced below : - Tariff Item No. Description of goods (i) Hand tools, the following : Pliers, (including cutting pliers), spanners, wrenches, files and rasps, screw drivers (including ratchet types); (ii) Tools for working in the hand pneumatic or with self-contained non-electric or electric motor; (iii) Tools designed to be fitted into hand tools, machine tools or tools falling under sub-i .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e tools. In order to obtain a more specific definition, machine tools have been defined as machines which, when taken as a group, will reproduce themselves. 11. The definition in the Engineering Encyclopaedia in our opinion is a proper and befitting definition of machine tool. 12. There is no dispute that the machines to which extrusion punches are fitted produce zinc can only. However, for the Revenue, support was attempted to be drawn from Chapter 84.45(iii) of B.T.N. Item 7, wherein complex machines for manufacturing boxes, cans and other similar containers of tin plate, even if incorporating soldering devices, are stated to be machine tools. Now, at no stage, the Revenue has alleged or tried to prove that the appellant s machines were complex machines. Before us also, no explanation was forthcoming from the Revenue as to why definition of machine tools was not taken from BTN as such. Further, in BTN, only complex machine manufacturing containers of tin pate, is stated to be machine tool. Whatever may be the reasons which prompted the said definition in BTN, we do not find any justification to extend that definition any further and bring the appellant s machine manufac .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ppellants factory for extrusion of zinc callots in the form of cans for manufacture of any cells. The extrusion punches are, therefore, covered by the expression Extrusion Dies for Metals . Unlike in the CCCN, the concept of inter-changeability does not apply in the case of Item 51A(iii) of the CET. The said sub-item (iii) reads as follows : - Tools designed to be fitted into hand tools, machine tools or tools falling under sub-item (ii) including dies for wire drawing, extrusion dies for metals and rock drilling bits . (Sub-item (ii) referred to in sub-item (iii) is not relevant for the present purpose). Having come to the conclusion that extrusion punches are covered within the expression extrusion dies for metal , the only point remaining to be considered is whether the can making machine to which the said extrusion punches are fitted is a machine tool or not for the purpose of the said sub-item. If the answer is in the affirmative, then the subject extrusion punches clearly fall under the said sub-item (iii) of Item 51A. 17. Now, one must note here that the nomenclature adopted for sub-item (iii) of Item 51A of the CET closely follows the nomenclature adopted in t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... extrusion dies for metals , the impugned goods are tools designed to be fitted into machine tools. The goods would, therefore, fall for classification under sub-item (iii) of Item 51A of the ECT. The appeal is, therefore, rejected. EDITOR S COMMENTS It has generally been observed that while interpreting the Central Excise Tariff entries, the CEGAT Benches are basing their decisions on the analogy drawn from the B.T.N. Explanatory Notes. In fact, the B.T.N. Explanatory Notes have not been adopted by India and they have no legal value even for classification on the Customs side, or the Central Excise side. Though this position has been admitted to some extent in the dissenting judgment of Member (Technical), yet both, the majority judgment and the dissenting judgment are based on B.T.N. The reason of not adopting the B.T.N. Explanatory Notes by India was that these notes do no suit to the India situations and conditions. Even the B.T.N. itself has been adopted by India after making such modifications so as to suit Indians situations. In so far as the Central Excise is concerned, the position has been clarified by the Bombay High Court in the case of Hyldyn Glass Works Pvt. Ltd .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates