https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83249 Punching of holes and separation of inner and outer forged rings were treated as part of the forging process, not as post-forging machining under the interpretative rules. On that basis, the rings retained their character as forged products, remained classifiable under Heading 7326.19, and continued to qualify for the benefit of Notification No. 223/88-C.E. The competing classification under Heading 84.62 was rejected. The limitation issue was also held against the revenue, with the demands treated as time-barred, including in light of approval of the classification list. The note states that such integrally connected forging operations do not justify reclassification where no further manufacturing process is shown. en-us Wed, 04 May 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 12 Jul 2011 11:11:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83249 Punching of holes and separation of inner and outer forged rings were treated as part of the forging process, not as post-forging machining under the interpretative rules. On that basis, the rings retained their character as forged products, remained classifiable under Heading 7326.19, and continued to qualify for the benefit of Notification No. 223/88-C.E. The competing classification under Heading 84.62 was rejected. The limitation issue was also held against the revenue, with the demands treated as time-barred, including in light of approval of the classification list. The note states that such integrally connected forging operations do not justify reclassification where no further manufacturing process is shown. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 04 May 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83249