Tribunal classifies Silver Palladium wire as platinum alloy under Central Excise Tariff Act

The Tribunal determined that the Silver Palladium wire manufactured by M/s. Choksi Heraeus Pvt. Ltd. should be classified as an alloy of platinum under sub-heading 7101.90 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, based on the provisions of Notes 3 and 4 to Chapter 71. Despite the appellant's argument that it should be classified as silver wire under sub-heading 7101.60 due to silver predominance, the Tribunal held that the product's palladium content (treated as platinum) exceeding 2% by weight categorizes it as a platinum alloy. The appeal was dismissed in favor of the Department's classification.

---

---

Issues: Classification of Silver Palladium wire under Central Excise Tariff Act

In this appeal, the main issue is whether the Silver Palladium wire manufactured by M/s. Choksi Heraeus Pvt. Ltd. should be classified under sub-heading 7101.60 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, as claimed by the appellant, or under 7101.90 as confirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals) under the impugned order.

Analysis:

The appellant argued that since the impugned wire contains 70% silver and 30% Palladium, with silver predominating by weight, it should be classified as silver wire under sub-heading 7101.60. On the other hand, the Departmental Representative relied on Note 4 read with Note 3(b) to Chapter 71, which states that an alloy containing 2% or more by weight of palladium should be treated as an alloy of platinum. The Department also referred to a previous Tribunal decision in a similar case.

The Tribunal considered the submissions of both parties and examined Notes 3 and 4 to Chapter 71. Note 3(b) defines the expression 'Platinum' to include palladium, among other metals. Note 4 provides rules for classifying alloys of precious metals, stating that an alloy containing 2% or more by weight of platinum should be treated as an alloy of platinum. Given that the product in question contains 30% palladium (treated as platinum per Note 3(b)), it falls under the category of platinum alloys, as per the provisions of Note 4.

The Tribunal emphasized that the product must be considered a product of platinum due to containing more than 2% by weight of palladium (treated as platinum). The Tribunal distinguished the application of clause (c) of Note 4, which pertains to "other alloys" not covered by clauses (a) or (b). Referring to a previous case involving a similar silver palladium alloy, the Tribunal concluded that the product should be treated as an alloy of platinum, as it contains more than 2% by weight of palladium (treated as platinum). The appeal was dismissed based on these findings.

---