TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
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 Upholds Classification of Molybdenum Glass Electrodes</h1> <h3>ALEMBIC GLASS INDUSTRIES LTD. Versus COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS</h3> The Tribunal upheld the classification of imported Molybdenum Glass Electrodes under Heading 81.01/04(1) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The decision was ... Classification Issues:Classification of imported Molybdenum Glass Electrodes under Customs Tariff Act, 1975.Detailed Analysis:Issue: Classification of imported Molybdenum Glass ElectrodesThe case involved the classification of Molybdenum Glass Electrodes imported by Alembic Glass Industries Ltd. The appellant claimed the goods should be reassessed under Heading 85.11 or 85.18/27(3) of the Customs Tariff Act. The Assistant Collector classified the goods under Heading 81.01/04(1) of CTA 75, attracting the same duty rate as 85.12 of CTA 75. The Collector of Customs (Appeals) upheld this classification, stating that the electrodes were used in glass melting industries and did not fall under Heading 85.18/27(3). The appellant appealed to the Tribunal, represented by Shri B.G. Sarang, who argued that the goods should be classified under Heading 85.11(1) of CTA 1975, emphasizing that the electrodes were parts of a furnace and essential for glass melting. The respondent, represented by Shri J. Gopinath, contended that the case was similar to a previous judgment involving the same appellant and argued for dismissal based on lack of new arguments. The Tribunal examined the purity of the imported electrodes and concluded that they should be classified under Heading 81.01/04(1) of CTA 75, affirming the lower authorities' decision. The Tribunal rejected the appeal, stating that the arguments presented did not warrant a different classification and did not necessitate referral to a larger Bench.The Tribunal noted that the appellant had not challenged the earlier judgment before the Supreme Court, which had addressed the same issue and involved identical goods imported by the same appellant. Despite the appellant's reliance on Section Note 1(f) to Section XVI, the Tribunal found that the previous decision must be accepted as final. President S. Venkatesan agreed with Member (J) Harish Chander's conclusion to reject the appeal based on the precedent set by the Tribunal's earlier decision. Member (T) I.J. Rao also concurred with the rejection of the appeal.In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the classification of Molybdenum Glass Electrodes under Heading 81.01/04(1) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, based on the purity of the imported goods and the precedent set by a previous judgment involving the same appellant. The appeal was rejected, emphasizing the importance of accepting established decisions in similar cases.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
