1998 (4) TMI 231 - AT - Central Excise

Tribunal classifies loose braidings as 'other articles of iron and steel'

COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., CHENNAI Versus HYDRAULIC HOSE (P) LTD.

COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., CHENNAI Versus HYDRAULIC HOSE (P) LTD. - 1998 (102) E.L.T. 168 (Tribunal) Issues: Classification of goods under Chapter Heading 8307.00 vs. 7312.90In this case, the primary issue revolves around the correct classification of goods under Chapter Heading 8307.00 or 7312.90. The Collector (Appeals) initially classified the goods under Chapter Heading 8307.00 based on the reliance on Chapter Note (1) of Chapter 83, which states that parts of base metal are to be classified with their parent articles. However, the Collector (Appeals) concluded that loose braidings should be classified under Heading 7312.90, as they are not identifiable independently as parts of flexible steel hose pipes and serve the purpose of providing additional strength to the pipes. The revenue, on the other hand, argued that the loose braidings are produced after feeding the hose into the Braiding Machine and should be classified as part of the hose pipes under Chapter 83.The second issue raised by the revenue was that the loose braidings are used with hose pipes and should be considered as parts of the hose pipes for classification under Chapter 83. The revenue contended that the loose braidings cannot be produced independently without the hose pipe and are manufactured only with steel hose pipes, thus should be classified as part of the parent article. They also referred to the HSN Explanatory Note under Chapter 83 to support their argument.During the hearing, the revenue reiterated their grounds for classification under Chapter 83, emphasizing that the steel braidings are used with hose pipes and should be considered as parts of the hose pipes. The advocate for the respondent, however, presented samples of the item showing its use with PVC pipes, rubber hoses, and tufflon articles, arguing that the loose braidings are independent articles with various uses and are not manufactured solely as part of hose pipes.Upon careful consideration of the submissions and examination of the article, the Tribunal found no infirmity in the impugned order. The loose braidings were traded and sold for various uses beyond hose pipes, such as PVC pipes and tufflon articles. The Tribunal concluded that the loose braidings are not manufactured as part of hose pipes for fitment but are independent articles made of iron and steel. Therefore, the classification under Chapter sub-heading 7312.90 as 'other articles of iron and steel' was deemed appropriate. The Tribunal also highlighted that the loose braidings were not brought out along with the manufacture of rubber hose pipes and were complete articles traded independently. The Tribunal upheld the classification under Chapter sub-heading 7312.90, emphasizing that the loose braidings are not to be considered as parts of hose pipes based on Chapter Note (1) of Chapter 83, which excludes articles of iron and steel from being classified as parts of articles of the same chapter.In conclusion, the appeal by the revenue was rejected, and the classification of the goods under Chapter sub-heading 7312.90 as 'other articles of iron and steel' was upheld.