TMI Blog2003 (1) TMI 700X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nal judgment and Order in Appeal Nos. E-289-293/1988-D, dated January 9, 2001. All these twenty appeals relate to the Assessment Years 1979 to 1986, albeit, for different periods. Civil Appeal No. 5711 of 1999 is filed by the Revenue, dissatisfied by the final judgment and order of the C.E.G.A.T. in Final Order No. 351/99-B in Appeal No. E/2483/1992-B passed on April 6, 1999 and it relates to the Assessment year 1986-87. 2. In the order impugned in the first set of appeals, the Tribunal applied the functional test and classified those thirty two items, manufactured by the assessee, under Tariff Item 52 of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Act, 1944. The classification was based on the finding recorded by the Tribunal, after referring to the findings in the identical case of M/s. Hindustan Motors Limited v. Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta [Tribunal s Order No. E/333/93-D, dated 6th October, 1993 in Appeal No. E/882/85-D]. The finding reads as follows : ... the Tribunal had clearly held that goods, even though used as component parts of motor vehicles having a fastening function primarily, are to be classified under Item 52 C.E.T. (Emphasis supplied) Two po ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lassifiable under Tariff Item 68. 6. On the basis of similar findings and following the principle laid down in Purewal Associates Limited (supra), the Tribunal [in the order in question in Civil Appeal No. 5711 of 1999], having regard to the change of scheme of classification of goods under the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 held, for the Assessment Year 1986-87, that the said goods were classifiable under Chapter Heading 87.07 and not under Chapter Heading 73.18, as contended by the Revenue. 7. Mr. S. Ganesh, learned senior Counsel appearing for the assessee, contends that inasmuch as the test laid down in Purewal Associates Limited (supra), namely, the test of commercial identity, was not available to the Tribunal when it passed the order, now subject-matter of the first set of appeals, it erred in applying the functional test and holding that the goods in question are classifiable under Tariff Item 52, as it existed prior to the commencement of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and, therefore, the order of the Tribunal is liable to be set aside. He submits that after having the benefit of the law laid down by this Court in Purewal Associates Limited (supra), the Tribuna ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ub Bolt Washers; (25) Checknuts; (26) Shaft Bolts; (27) Misc. Bolts; (28) Sprint Shackle Assembly; (29) Gun Metal Bushes; (30) King Pin King Pin Unit; (31) Fan Blades; and (32) Spring Hanger Brackets. 11. As the controversy centres round Tariff Items 52 and 68 in the First Schedule of the Central Excise Act, 1944, it will be apt to refer them here. They read as follows : Item No. Description of goods Rate of duty (1) (2) (3) 52. Bolts and nuts, threaded or tapped and screws, of base metal or alloys thereof, in or in relation to the manufacture of which any process is ordinarily carried on with the aid of power. Fifteen per cent ad valorem Explanation: - The expression Bolts and nuts, threaded or tapped and screws used in this item shall include bolt ends, screw studs, screw studding, self-tapped screws, screw hooks and screw rings. Item No. Description of goods ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (ii) Clutch facings; (iii) Engine valves; (iv) Gaskets; (v) Nozzles and nozzle holders; (vi) Pistons; (vii) Piston rings; (viii) Gudgeon pins; (ix) Circlips; (x) Shock absorbers; (xi) Sparking plugs; (xii) Tin-walled bearings; (xiii) Tie rod ends; (xiv) Electric horns; (xv) Filte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... contended that they would fall under Tariff Item 52 as they were nothing but screws. It was observed that the Tribunal had rightly taken note of the test laid down by this Court in several decisions but misdirected itself in applying it. The test is that while interpreting the entries in the Schedule, they must be construed and understood as in common parlance and words used by the Legislature must be given their popular sense, namely that sense people conversant with the subject matter with which the statute was dealing would attribute to it. Applying the test of commercial parlance for identity of the goods and referring to the observation of this Court in Plasmac Machine Mfg. Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise [1991 (51) E.L.T. 161 (S.C.)], it was held that the goods were classifiable under Tariff Item 68. The other appeal dealt with thirty two articles of different kinds of connecting rod bolts (bolt rear wheel, bolt front wheel, etc). It is on this part of the judgment that Mr. Dileep Tandon has placed strong reliance to show that nuts and bolts even if integral parts of machinery would be falling under Tariff Item 52. It would be useful to notice here the following ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssion, if we read the findings of fact recorded by the Tribunal in the appeals before us, referred to above, it cannot but be concluded that the goods in question, which are found to be parts of automobile were wrongly classified under Tariff Item 52 by the Tribunal in Civil Appeal Nos. 4598-4612 of 1994 and were rightly classified as falling under Tariff Item 68 in Civil Appeal Nos. 5701-5705 of 2001. 22. So far as Civil Appeal No. 5711 of 1999 is concerned, the classification of goods was done under the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (for the post-1986 period). The competing Heading numbers are 73.18 and 87.08, which read as under : Heading No. Sub-Heading No. Description of goods Rate of duty (1) (2) (3) (4) 73.18 Screws, bolts, nuts, coach-screws, screw-hooks, rivets, cotters, cotter-pins, washers (including spring washers) and similar articles, of iron or steel 7318.10 -Threaded articles 20% He ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ral use throughout the Schedule, means, inter alia, articles of Heading No. 73.18 and similar articles of other base metal; and the expression part and accessories in Chapter Heading 87.08 does not apply to parts or accessories which are not suitable for use solely or primarily with articles of Chapter Heading 87.08 which pertains to parts and accessories of motor vehicles of Chapter Heading Nos. 87.01 to 87.05. For the purposes of classification under Chapter Heading 87.08, the test to be applied is: whether the goods are suitable for use solely or primarily with articles of Chapter Heading Nos. 87.01 to 87.05; if the answer is in the affirmative, the goods will be classifiable under Chapter Heading 87.08, but if the answer is in the negative, they would have to be classified under Chapter Heading No. 73.18. Having regard to the finding that the goods in question cannot but be regarded as parts of automobiles, it has to be held that they are suitable for use primarily with articles of Chapter Heading Nos. 87.01 to 87.05. It follows that the goods in question cannot be treated as falling under Chapter Heading No. 73.18 and that they can properly be classified under Chapter Headi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
