2016 (4) TMI 540 - AT - Central Excise

Court affirms brass granules classification under CETH 74.06, interprets Section note 6 to CETA.

Commissioner of Central Excise, Lucknow Versus M/s Kwality Metal Works, M/s SK Metal Industries, M/s MD Products

The court upheld the classification of brass granules under CETH 74.06, emphasizing the predominance of copper by weight and interpreting Section note 6 ... Classification - Brass granules - Whether to be classified under CETH 7403.21 or under CETH 74.06 - Held that:- it is observed that first appellate authority has relied upon HSN explanatory notes for chapter heading 74.06, according to which bronze powder is also classifiable under 74.06. It is also observed that as per Section Note 7 of Section-XV of the CETA composite articles are to be classified on the basis of the base metal that predominates by weight over each of the other metal. In the present case 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 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, the order passed by first appellate authority is upheld. Classification - Cast form of Copper - Whether to be classified as 'billets' or as 'Ingot' and eligible for exemption under notification - Held that:- if the definitions of 'Ingot' and 'Billets' were uniform for all base metal then the same could have been placed as Section notes under Section XV of CETA. In view of the definitions given in Indian Standard for Copper and copper alloys will be more appropriate and the definitions of 'Billets & Ingot' given in chapter notes under Chapter 72 of the CETA cannot be applied to Interpret entries of Chapter-74, as these notes are not existing as Section notes under Section XV of CETA. Therefore, the cast articles manufactured by the Respondents for further working are appropriately classifiable as 'billets' and will be eligible to exemption under Notification No. 9/2003-CE dated 1/3/2003, as amended. - Decided against the revenue Issues involved:1. Classification of brass granules under CETH 7403.21 or CETH 74.06.2. Classification of cast form of Copper as 'billets' or 'Ingots'.Analysis:1. The first issue pertains to the classification of brass granules. The Revenue argued for classification under CETH 7403.21, while the Respondents claimed classification under CETH 74.06. The first appellate authority classified the granules under CETH 74.06, relying on HSN explanatory notes and the predominance of copper by weight. The bench upheld this classification, noting that copper predominates and that the absence of specific mention of copper alloys in CETH 74.06 does not exclude them. Section note 6 to Section XV of CETA also supports this interpretation, leading to the dismissal of the Revenue's appeal.2. The second issue revolves around the classification of the cast form of Copper as 'billets' or 'Ingots'. The Revenue contended that the products constituted ingots, making them ineligible for small-scale exemption. They relied on the definitions of 'Ingot' and 'Billet' under Chapter 72 of the CETA. In contrast, the Respondents argued that these definitions should not apply to Chapter 74 entries, citing Indian Standards for Copper and Copper Alloys. The bench agreed with the Respondents, emphasizing that the definitions of 'Billets' and 'Ingots' differ for different base metals. As per Indian Standards, billets are intended for further working, while ingots are for remelting. Since the cast articles were not meant for remelting, they were appropriately classified as 'billets'. Therefore, the bench upheld the orders of the first appellate authority, resulting in the dismissal of the Revenue's appeals.