Wire harness classification and manufacture principles upheld; later-period differential duty demand sustained after final assessment.

Wiring harness, cable harness and handle bar harness made from cut wires and cables fitted with connectors were held classifiable under sub-heading 8544.00 because the tariff entry for insulated wires and cables covered goods whether or not fitted with connectors, and the specific heading prevailed over a parts-and-accessories description. The process of assembling wires and cables into harnesses amounted to manufacture because it produced a distinct commercial commodity with a different name, character and use, even though the input and final product remained within the same tariff heading. For limitation, the later-period differential duty demand was sustainable after final assessment, while the earlier period remained time-barred.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether wiring harness, cable harness and handle bar harness were correctly classifiable under sub-heading 8544.00 of the Central Excise Tariff; (ii) Whether fitting wires and cables with connectors and putting them in a casing amounted to manufacture under the Central Excise law; (iii) Whether the differential duty demand for the period prior to final assessment and notice was sustainable under the limitation scheme.

Issue (i): Whether wiring harness, cable harness and handle bar harness were correctly classifiable under sub-heading 8544.00 of the Central Excise Tariff.

Analysis: The goods were wires and cables cut to length, fitted with connectors and assembled into harnesses. The classification entry for insulated wires and cables specifically covered goods whether or not fitted with connectors. The relevant section note and chapter note scheme required goods already falling in Chapter 85 to be classified there, and the HSN explanatory notes supported retention of such goods in Heading 85.44 even after cutting and fitting with connectors. The entries for parts and accessories of vehicles did not prevail where the goods were independently covered by the specific tariff heading.

Conclusion: The goods were correctly classifiable under sub-heading 8544.00, against the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether fitting wires and cables with connectors and putting them in a casing amounted to manufacture under the Central Excise law.

Analysis: The process brought into existence a distinct commercial commodity with a different name, character and use, namely cable harness or wire harness, from the input wires and cables. Manufacture does not depend on a change in tariff heading; it is sufficient if a new and distinct commodity emerges. The fact that both input and final product may fall in the same tariff heading does not negate manufacture.

Conclusion: The process amounted to manufacture, against the assessee.

Issue (iii): Whether the differential duty demand for the period prior to final assessment and notice was sustainable under the limitation scheme.

Analysis: The classification list had been provisionally approved and later finalized by the adjudication order, which also confirmed the duty demand. The demand related to clearances preceding the show cause notice but followed final assessment. In that situation, the relevant date for limitation is the date of adjustment after final assessment, and the demand for the six-month period prior to the notice was maintainable. At the same time, the demand for the earlier period had already been found time-barred by the lower appellate authority and no ground existed to interfere with that finding.

Conclusion: The demand for the six months prior to the notice was sustainable, while the earlier period remained time-barred.

Final Conclusion: The classification and manufacture objections failed, the later-period duty demand was upheld, and the earlier time-barred period was left undisturbed, with no interference in either appeal.

Ratio Decidendi: Goods that emerge after processing into a distinct commercial commodity are dutiable as manufactured products, and where final assessment precedes confirmation of differential duty, limitation under section 11A is computed from the relevant date of final assessment.

---