1988 (7) TMI 183 - AT - Central Excise

Tribunal classifies blades under Item 51A(iii) Schedule, sets aside Collector's order, rules in favor of appellants.

DIES & TOOLS LTD. Versus COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE

The Tribunal held that the blades should be classified under Item No. 51A(iii) of the Schedule, setting aside the Collector's order and allowing the ... Classification of goods Issues: Classification of blades under Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944Issue 1: Classification of blades under Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944The appeal challenged the Order-in-Revision passed by the Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta, reclassifying T.C. tipped and H.S.S. Serrated type blades for milling cutters under a different item in the Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. The dispute revolved around whether the blades should be classified under Item No. 51A(iii) or Item No. 51A(iv) of the Schedule.Analysis:The appellants argued that the blades were specifically designed for milling cutters and not for hand or machine saws. They emphasized that milling cutters are distinct from hand or machine saws, as they are used for processes like slotting, boring, drilling, and not for sawing or parting materials. The blades manufactured by the appellants were unfinished and required further processing before being used for cutting purposes.The Collector relied on the explanatory notes to the Customs Co-operation Council Nomenclature (C.C.C.N.) heading 82.06, which included blades and knives for fitting into tools for machine tools like reamers or milling cutters. The Collector classified the blades under Item No. 51A(iv) based on this interpretation, considering them as replaceable knives for machine tools.During the hearing, the appellants were absent, and the Tribunal observed that the Collector's decision seemed to be based on his own logic without addressing the appellants' submissions. The Tribunal noted that if the blades were intended for fitting into tools for machine tools, a more appropriate classification would be under Item No. 51A(iii) of the Schedule.The Tribunal found the Collector's reliance on the C.C.C.N. notes misplaced, as the wording and scope of the entries under the C.C.C.N. heading and the Central Excises and Salt Act were not identical. The Tribunal highlighted that the subject goods, designed to be fitted into machine tools like milling cutters, fell under Item No. 51A(iii) of the Schedule, as they were rotating tools for milling machines, distinct from the examples provided in the C.C.C.N. notes.Based on the analysis, the Tribunal held that the blades should be classified under Item No. 51A(iii) of the Schedule, setting aside the Collector's order and allowing the appeal in favor of the appellants.