TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal remands case for detailed assessment on steel product classification</h1> The Tribunal set aside the lower authorities' orders and remanded the case to the Assistant Collector for a detailed assessment based on complete ... Iron or steel products Issues:Assessment of steel products as strips under Item 25(12) CET vs. under Item 25(8) CET.Detailed Analysis:Issue 1: Assessment of steel products as strips under Item 25(12) CET vs. under Item 25(8) CETThe appeals involved a dispute between the department and the assessees regarding the proper assessment of steel products. The department argued that the products should be assessed as strips under Item 25(12) CET due to their contours and cross-sections resembling strips as defined in the tariff. On the other hand, the assessees contended that the goods should be assessed under Item 25(8) CET as pieces roughly shaped by rolling or forging of iron or steel. The assessees highlighted that the goods, known as pattis and pattas, were not manufactured in strip mills and were used for manufacturing utensils, having short length straight products with uneven thickness and sides, unlike traditional strips. They also pointed out a government notification exempting goods as pattis or pattas of stainless steel under Chapter 72 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, supporting their argument.Issue 2: Interpretation of the Central Excise Tariff DefinitionThe adjudicating authorities based their decisions on the Central Excise Tariff definition of strips as hot or cold rolled products with specific characteristics. The definition included products rolled in rectangular cross-section of thickness usually 10 mm and below, with mill, rolled, trimmed, or sheared edges, supplied in coil or flattened coil form. The crucial point of contention was whether the products, although in straight lengths, could still be classified as strips if they met the dimensional requirements outlined in the definition. The Member (T) clarified that the definition required the products to be in coil form or flattened coil form, even if in straight lengths, emphasizing that the absence of coiling in the manufacturing process was a significant factor in determining the proper classification.Issue 3: Need for Detailed Surface MeasurementsThe lack of recorded widths of the products raised concerns about accurately assessing the proportional surface measurements, which could impact the classification of the products. The absence of comprehensive dimensions hindered the ability to determine whether the products more closely resembled strips or sheets based on their shape, thickness, and cross-section. Consequently, the Tribunal decided to remand the cases to the Assistant Collector to provide all necessary details for a proper assessment, emphasizing the importance of recording precise measurements and dimensions to determine the appropriate classification of the products.In conclusion, the Tribunal set aside the orders of the lower authorities and directed a remand to the Assistant Collector for a detailed assessment based on complete measurements and dimensions to ascertain the correct classification of the steel products.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
