2005 (10) TMI 458 - AT - Central Excise

CAM-forgings classified under Heading 7326.19, not 7224.00. Precedent upheld, Revenue appeal denied.

The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai ruled that cam-forgings are classified under Heading 7326.19 as other forgings, not under Heading 7224.00 as ... Classification of goods - Forgings versus finished alloy steel products - Tariff heading 7326 - Tariff heading 7224 - Applicability of precedent on classificationClassification of goods - Forgings versus finished alloy steel products - Tariff heading 7326 - Tariff heading 7224 - Applicability of precedent on classification - Classification of cam-forgings manufactured by the respondent as other forgings under Heading 7326 rather than finished 'other alloy steel' products under Heading 7224. - HELD THAT: - The appellate authority found that the cam-forgings were not further worked upon and therefore were properly classifiable as other forgings under Heading 7326. The Revenue's contention that the goods were finished products falling under Heading 7224 as 'Other alloy steel' was considered and rejected. The Court applied the principle from Collector of Central Excise v. Jaypee Forges, which holds that forgings of alloy steel are covered by Heading 7326. On that basis the view recorded by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) that the goods are other forgings within Heading 7326 was accepted.Revenue's appeal rejected; cam-forgings held to be classifiable under Heading 7326 as other forgings.Final Conclusion: The appeal by the Revenue is dismissed; the cam-forgings produced by the respondent are held to be other forgings classifiable under Heading 7326, in accordance with the cited precedent. The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai ruled on the correct classification of cam-forgings, determining they fall under Heading 7326.19 as other forgings, not under Heading 7224.00 as finished products. The decision was based on a previous Supreme Court ruling. The appeal by the Revenue was rejected.