TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Product 'CAM' classified as transmission shaft under Heading 8483.00, not 8479.00. Upheld decision based on power transmission function.</h1> <h3>PAM PHARMA & ALLIED MACHINERY CO. LTD. Versus COMMR. OF C. EX., MUMBAI</h3> PAM PHARMA & ALLIED MACHINERY CO. LTD. Versus COMMR. OF C. EX., MUMBAI - 2006 (193) E.L.T. 592 (Tri. - Mumbai) Issues:Classification of the product 'CAM' under Heading 8483.00 or Heading 8479.00.Analysis:The disputed issue in this case revolves around the correct classification of the product 'CAM' manufactured by the appellants. The Revenue has classified it under Heading 8483.00, while the appellants claim it should be classified under Heading 8479.00. The product 'CAM' is described as a groove on the flat face or profile on the outside diameter, which transmits rotary motion to linear motion of the driven member, resulting in oscillating motion. The CAM is mounted on the machine member, deriving its rotary motion from an electric motor through linkages.The Commissioner (Appeals) observed that the CAM falls under Heading 8483.00 based on the HSN explanatory notes, which categorize goods under this heading as mechanical parts used in the transmission of power from an external power unit to machines or internal parts of a machine transmitting power to various parts. The CAM, being integral in transmitting power for sequencing machines, is considered an internal part of the machine falling under the first category of mechanical parts. Referring to a previous CEGAT decision, it was established that parts of parts are classifiable as parts of a machine. Therefore, the product 'CAM' is correctly classified under Chapter sub-heading 8483.00, and the appeal was rejected upholding the impugned order.The appellants failed to provide reasoning or arguments contrary to the Revenue's classification in their appeal. They reiterated the functioning of the CAM without presenting any substantial arguments for its classification under Heading 8479.00. The authorities concluded that the CAM is essentially a transmission shaft, leading to its proper classification under Heading 8483.00. Consequently, the appeal was rejected based on this classification.In summary, the judgment affirms the classification of the product 'CAM' under Heading 8483.00 as a transmission shaft, in line with the Revenue's assessment and the detailed analysis provided by the authorities, rejecting the appellant's claim for classification under Heading 8479.00.
TaxTMI 