TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1980 (4) TMI 296
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he ground of clandestine removal. 3. With regard to the classification of the goods, as these goods are made out of copper wire (wound as ropes) which have been cleared on payment of duty under Item 33B(ii) of the Central Excise Tariff; and further fabricated with metal clamps at the two ends, so that these could be fastened to the transformer at one end and the welding gun given on the other, the Board is of the view that these cannot attract duty again under Item 33-B(ii). The nature of manufacture and the particular use for which these goods are intended rule out their classification under Item 33-B(ii). Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. Note:- Since the order-in-revision is a scrappy one therefore order-in- original is publis....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ires under Item 33B. Shri Wagh, further, argued that the cables was treated as part of machinery under the Customs Tariff. As an evidence of his contention he produced for my inspection a Bill of Entry for the import of the cable in question by M/s. Premier Automobiles Limited, Bombay. The description of the cable mentioned thereto was read out as also the old classification for Customs purpose under items 72(3)/72(c). Shri Wagh, further read out the tariff-description of the aforesaid items from the old Customs tariff. He emphasised the point that the classification of the cable under the former Customs Tariff was as a part of machinery and not as electric cable. Since the water cooled spot welding cable had been made out of duty paid copp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....facturing process and inspecting the goods. However, the clarification was given verbally only and no record was available of the same. Since Shri Wagh finally submitted that the matter was pending decision since 1972 and the company was paying duty under protest and therefore he requested that an early decision might be given. Shri Wagh submitted that he may be permitted to file a written statement of oral arguments advanced by him at the time of the personal hearing. The written submissions have been received on 1-8-1979 from Shri Wagh. FINDINGS I have examined the submissions, both oral and written of M/s. Kay Vybin Corporation. The main contention advanced by the company is that the spot welding cable is classifiable under Item 33....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....estion was manufactured and which was purchased by the company from the market as per its statement was classifiable under Item 33-B. Another argument advanced by the company is that on the analogy of the Customs classification of the cable under Items 72(3)/72(c) of the former Customs Tariff, the classification of the cable in question under the Central Excise Tariff should be as a part of machinery. This argument in not tenable as there is no correlation between the Customs Classification and the Central Excise classification for any commodity. Furthermore, the fact that the raw materials for the manufacture of spot welding cables have paid Central Excise duty is not wholly relevant. It is amply borne out from the above examination that a....