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 Brake Linings Classification as Asbestos Articles</h1> <h3>BRAKES INDIA LTD. Versus COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS</h3> The Tribunal upheld the classification of imported brake linings under Heading 68.01/16(a) as articles of asbestos, rejecting the appellants' argument for ... Classification Issues:Classification of imported brake linings under Item 68.01/16(a) as articles of asbestos or under Item 87.04/06(2) as parts designed for articles covered by sub-heading (1) of Item 87.01.Analysis:The appeal was against the Order-in-Appeal passed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals), Madras, regarding the classification of imported brake linings. The appellants imported brake linings assessed under Item 68.01/16(a) as articles of asbestos and later filed a refund application for re-assessment under Heading 87.01, which was rejected. The Assistant Collector and the Collector (Appeals) upheld the classification under Item 68.01/16(a), considering the Explanatory Notes and the composition of the goods. The appellants argued that the imported item, being an integral component of the brake assembly of an Agricultural tractor, should be classified under Item 87.04/06(2) as a specially designed part. They contended that the Explanatory Notes are not legally binding and that the item's essential character should determine its classification. They cited relevant case law and the Interpretation Rules to support their position.The Department justified the classification under Heading 68.01/16, stating that the item in question is a part of the sub-assembly and should be classified accordingly. They emphasized the guidance provided by tariff entries and Explanatory Notes in the classification process.The Tribunal examined the tariff entries for both classifications and considered the arguments presented. It noted that the appellants claimed the item should be classified under a specific item (87.04/06(2)) as a part designed for articles covered by Item 87.01(1), while the Department argued for classification under the general description item (68.01/16). The Tribunal found the appellants' argument challenging, as the specific item did not mention being part of the part of the main article. The Tribunal also highlighted that the item, being part of a sub-assembly, falls under the general description item. It emphasized that the Explanatory Notes, though not legally binding, supported the classification under Heading 68.01/16. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the classification under Heading 68.01/16(a) as articles of asbestos and dismissed the appeal.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
