Separate classification of rotors and stators failed where no identifiable electric motor emerged in mono block pump manufacture.

Rotors and stators used in the manufacture of a mono block pump were not liable to duty as parts of an electric motor because no electric motor emerged in an identifiable or separable form during manufacture. Under the old Central Excise Tariff, electric motors and their parts were separately classifiable, but set-off applied only where duty-paid rotors and stators were used in the manufacture of an electric motor. As the components formed part of the mono block pump and did not result in a distinct motor, the Revenue's challenge failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether rotors and stators used in the manufacture of a mono block pump could be subjected to duty as parts of an electric motor when no electric motor came into existence in an identifiable and separable form.

Analysis: The dispute was covered by earlier Tribunal orders on the same issue. The relevant approach under the old Central Excise Tariff treated electric motors and their parts, including rotors and stators, as separately classifiable, but set-off was available only where duty-paid rotors and stators were used in the manufacture of an electric motor. On the facts, the rotors and stators were used as component parts of the mono block pump, and the electric motor did not emerge in an identifiable or separable form during manufacture.

Conclusion: The rotors and stators were not liable to be treated as having resulted in a separately identifiable electric motor, and the Revenue's challenge failed.

---