2000 (9) TMI 365 - AT - Central Excise

Appellate Tribunal rules thermocouple extension cable should be classified under Chapter 90, not Heading 85.44

The Appellate Tribunal rejected the Revenue's appeal regarding the classification of thermocouple extension cable under the Central Excise Tariff Act, ... Classification of goods - Tariff heading 85.44 - electric conductors and cables - Chapter 90 - instruments and apparatus for measuring - Note 1(h) to Chapter 90 - Role of thermocouple in generating and transmitting electromotive force - Precedent of Larger Bench of Tribunal (Fykays Engg. P. Ltd.)Classification of goods - Tariff heading 85.44 - electric conductors and cables - Chapter 90 - instruments and apparatus for measuring - Note 1(h) to Chapter 90 - Precedent of Larger Bench of Tribunal (Fykays Engg. P. Ltd.) - Thermocouple extension cable is not classifiable under Sub-heading 8544.90 but under Heading 90.25 as held by the Commissioner (Appeals). - HELD THAT: - The Tribunal applied the Larger Bench decision in Collector of C. Ex., Bombay v. Fykays Engg. P. Ltd., which held that mineral insulated thermocouple leads transmit the electromotive force generated at the thermocouple junction to a pyrometer and thus are properly characterised with instruments for measuring temperature under Chapter 90. The Larger Bench observed that Heading 85.44 covers electric conductors generally and specifically includes optical fibre cables; Note 1(h) to Chapter 90 excludes optical fibre cables from that Chapter, indicating Parliament's intention to treat certain cables under Heading 85.44 only where specifically included. Absent a specific inclusion of thermocouple leads within Heading 85.44, their description as thermocouple leads does not suffice to treat them as general electric conductors under Heading 85.44. The Commissioner (Appeals) followed this ratio and allowed classification under Heading 90.25. The Revenue did not challenge the applicability of the Larger Bench precedent to the present facts; consequently the Tribunal, following that binding ratio, found no merit in the Revenue's appeal. [Paras 2, 3]Appeal rejected; classification under Heading 90.25 upheld following the Larger Bench precedent.Final Conclusion: The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal and upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)'s classification of the thermocouple extension cable under Heading 90.25, applying the Larger Bench ratio in Fykays Engg. P. Ltd. and noting the absence of any challenge to that precedent. The judgment concerns the classification of thermocouple extension cable under the Central Excise Tariff Act. The Appellate Tribunal, following a previous decision, ruled that the cable should be classified under Chapter 90, not Heading 85.44 as claimed by the Revenue. The appeal by the Revenue was rejected based on this ruling.