Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the items cleared by the appellant under contracts for supply and erection of lifts and escalators were classifiable under Heading 8428 as lifts and escalators, or under Heading 8431 as parts suitable for use with such machinery.
Analysis: The appellant cleared parts and components over a period of time and the complete lift or escalator came into existence only at the customer's site after assembly and commissioning. The classification turned on the nature of the goods as cleared from the factory, not on the ultimate contract for erection. Section Note 2(a) of Section XVI requires goods falling in a specific heading of Chapter 84 to be classified in their respective headings. The facts showed that the appellant manufactured and removed parts, not complete lifts or escalators, and the mere fact that the components were supplied under a single contract did not change their character. The Tribunal also distinguished the authorities relied on by the appellant and accepted the department's view that the goods remained parts for excise classification.
Conclusion: The goods were correctly classifiable under Heading 8431 as parts, and not under Heading 8428 as complete lifts or escalators.