Excise classification of steel crushing rings turned on actual nature and manufacture, not the assessee's description.

Steel crushing rings supplied by the assessee were treated as excisable goods because classification depended on their actual nature and the process applied to the received steel castings, not on the description adopted by the assessee. The record showed that goods purchased as steel castings were supplied as manganese steel crushing rings at a substantially higher value, and the description as steel castings was treated as misdeclaration. On that basis, the crushing rings were held excisable, the appellate view was rejected, and the demand was restored.

---

---

Issues: Whether steel crushing rings supplied by the assessee were excisable goods classifiable on their actual nature and process of manufacture, notwithstanding the description adopted by the assessee.

Analysis: The goods purchased as steel castings were supplied as manganese steel crushing rings at a substantially higher value. The description given to the goods was held to be immaterial for classification. What mattered was the actual nature of the goods and the process to which the received goods had been subjected. The record also showed that the assessee had cleared specialized parts as steel castings, which was treated as a misdeclaration.

Conclusion: The crushing rings were held to be excisable, the view of the appellate authority was rejected, and the demand was restored.

---