1980 (1) TMI 93 - HC - Central Excise

Court rules trolly stands by petitioner are steel furniture under excise law, clarifying classification principles.

The court ruled against the petitioner, holding that the trolly type stands manufactured by the petitioner-company are considered steel furniture under ... Trolly type stand attached to air-coolers Issues:Interpretation of entry 40 of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 - Whether trolly type stands manufactured by the petitioner-company are considered steel furniture under the Act.Analysis:The judgment in this case revolves around the interpretation of entry 40 of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, specifically focusing on whether the trolly type stands manufactured by the petitioner-company qualify as steel furniture. The petitioner, a public limited company engaged in the manufacture of Room Air-coolers, provided a trolly type stand made of steel as an accessory to the coolers. The introduction of Entry No. 40 in Schedule I to the Act made the Central Excise Department advise the petitioner that the trollies were liable to excise duty, leading to a dispute over the classification of these items.The petitioner argued that the trolly stands, being accessories to the air-coolers, should not be considered steel furniture within the meaning of entry No. 40. The court delved into the definition of 'furniture,' highlighting that the term is not explicitly defined in the Act. Referring to various sources, including Webster's dictionary and Corpus Juris Secundum, the court elucidated that furniture encompasses articles of convenience or decoration used to furnish a space, such as chairs, tables, beds, cabinets, and desks. The broad definition of furniture includes movable chattels that contribute to the use or convenience of a household or business premises.The court applied the definition of furniture to the trolly stands in question, emphasizing that the trolly, despite being an accessory, enhances the utility of the air-cooler in a household. The court rejected the petitioner's argument that the trolly stands should not be classified as steel furniture, citing precedents that differentiated between furniture and fixtures. The court distinguished previous cases involving seats in vehicles and hospital equipment, emphasizing that the trolly stands, being an integral part of the air-cooler setup, fall within the ambit of steel furniture as per entry No. 40.Ultimately, the court dismissed the petition, ruling against the petitioner's contention that the trolly stands were not covered by the term 'steel furniture.' The judgment underscores the application of legal principles and definitions to determine the classification of goods under excise laws, providing clarity on the scope of entry No. 40 in Schedule I of the Act.