Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Commissioner of Central Excise, Lucknow Versus M/s S.K. Metal Industries

2016 (9) TMI 1237 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD

Classification - Whether the brass granules manufactured by the appellant are required to be classified under CETH 74.0-3.21, as claimed by the Revenue or under CETH 74.06 as claimed by the Respondent - Held that:- copper predominates by weight and brass granules has to be treated as copper granules on the basis of predominance criteria. It is further observed that CETH 74.07 also pertains to copper bars, rods and profiles' but it also covers alloys of copper under CETH 7407.12. Accordingly, non .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

same should be classified as 'Ingot' claimed by the Revenue - whether the chapter notes under Chapter 72 of CETA can be made applicable to Chapter 74 entries - Held that:- if the definitions of 'Ingot' & 'Billet' were uniform for all base metal then the same could have been placed as Section notes under Section XV of CETA. As per the above definition given in Indian Standards for copper and copper alloys both Billets & Ingots are products of casting. Billets of Copper & Copper alloys are intende .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s Section notes under Section XV of CETA. In view of the above, we hold that cast articles manufactured by the Respondents for further working are appropriately classified as 'billets' and will be eligible to exemption under Notification No.9/2003-CE dated 01.03.2003, as amended. - Decided against the Revenue - E/2223/07 - Final Order No. 70607/2016 - Dated:- 29-7-2016 - Mr. Anil Choudhary, Member (Judicial) and Mr. Anil G. Shakkarwar, Member (Technical) Shri D. K. Deb, Asstt. Commr. (AR.) for t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

2003, as amended. It is the case of the Revenue that as per the definition of Ingots & Billets given in chapter Notes under Chapter 72 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (CETA) the product manufactured by the Respondents is Ingots whereas they have mis-declared their products as 'brass/billets weighing upto 5 kg.' Learned A.R. made the bench go through the appeals filed by the Revenue to argue that as per HSN explanatory notes for Chapter-72 also, the goods manufacture by the Res .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

A)(a) of Notification No.9/2003-CE dated 01.03.2003. 3. None present for the respondent in spite of notice having been sent to them well in advance. However, the appellant has submitted a written submission praying for a decision on merit, wherein the Respondents contended that chapter notes under Chapter 72 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (CETA) and HSN explanatory notes cannot be put into service for interpreting the entries of Chapter 74 of CETA. That no definition of 'Ingots' .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ard UDC 0014.4 : 669.3-14, the products manufactured by the Respondents, are billets as Respondents are not using the final cast product for re-melting and exemption has been correctly availed. Regarding classification of 'Brass Granules', it was argued by the appellant that CETH (Central Excise Tariff Heading) 74.05 will also cover similar brass items also. It was also held that the main heading not only covers copper brass, rods and profiles but also covers alloys of these goods under .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

red by the appellant are required to be classified under CETH 74.0-3.21, as claimed by the Revenue or under CETH 74.06 as claimed by the Respondent? (ii) Whether the cast form of Copper made by the Respondents should be classified as 'billets' as claimed by the Respondents or the same should be classified as 'Ingot' claimed by the Revenue? 5. So far point No.4(i) above, regarding classification of brass granules is concerned, first appellate authority has classified the same unde .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

granules has to be treated as copper granules on the basis of predominance criteria. It is further observed that CETH 74.07 also pertains to copper bars, rods and profiles' but it also covers alloys of copper under CETH 7407.12. Accordingly, non mention of copper alloys or Brass in CETH 74.06 does not mean that it will not contain copper alloys in its ambit Section note-6 to Section-XV of CETA also confirms this interpretation. Accordingly, this bench does not find any reason to interfere w .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nto service made applicable to the entries contained in Chapter-74 of CETA. It is further the case of the Respondents that Indian Standards for Copper and Copper Alloys define 'Ingot' & 'Billet' differently than the Iron Ingots & Billets defined in Chapter 72 of the CETA. The moot point, therefore, required to be decided is whether chapter notes under Chapter 72 of CETA can be made applicable to Chapter 74 entries. We are of the considered opinion that if the definitions .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version