Approved classification lists bar retrospective reassessment; chain conveyors without motors remain classifiable as conveyors, not parts.

An approved classification list could not be used to sustain a retrospective demand for an earlier period when reclassification was sought only prospectively; the demand was therefore time-barred. Chain conveyors cleared without a drive or electric motor remained classifiable as conveyors under heading 8428 because the motor is only the motive unit and is not essential to the identity of the equipment; they were not mere parts of conveyors under heading 8431. The classification in favour of the assessee was upheld on both limitation and merits.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the demand raised after approval of the classification list was barred by limitation because the classification was sought to be changed only prospectively; (ii) whether chain conveyors cleared without a drive or electric motor were classifiable as conveyors under heading 8428 or as parts of conveyors under heading 8431.

Issue (i): Whether the demand raised after approval of the classification list was barred by limitation because the classification was sought to be changed only prospectively.

Analysis: The classification list filed by the assessee for chain conveyors without drive had been approved and that approval was not disputed. The show cause notice was issued later for reclassifying the same goods for an earlier period. In such a situation, the demand could operate only from the date of reclassification, not for the prior period already covered by the approved classification. The principle applied was that a demand based on a fresh classification cannot be raised retrospectively against an approved classification list.

Conclusion: The demand was time-barred and the issue was decided in favour of the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether chain conveyors cleared without a drive or electric motor were classifiable as conveyors under heading 8428 or as parts of conveyors under heading 8431.

Analysis: The product remained a conveyor even without an electric motor, because the motor only supplied the driving force. The HSN Explanatory Notes to heading 8428 describe conveyors as equipment used for moving goods and do not make the presence of a motor essential. A conveyor does not cease to be a conveyor merely because it is supplied without the motive unit. Accordingly, the goods were not mere parts of conveyors.

Conclusion: The goods were correctly classifiable under heading 8428 and not under heading 8431, and this issue was decided in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The Revenue's appeal failed both on limitation and on merits, and the classification in favour of the assessee was upheld.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a classification list has been approved, a later attempt to reclassify goods cannot sustain a retrospective demand for the earlier approved period, and a conveyor remains classifiable as such even if sold without its driving motor when its essential conveying function continues to exist.

---