TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1994 (9) TMI 70
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Excise, issued a Show Cause Notice asking the appellants as to why the classification in respect of the Inserts approved earlier provisionally under T.I. No. 51A(iii) should not be changed to T.I. No. 62. A similar Show Cause Notice was issued in respect of the Classification List No. 5 effective from 20-6-1979, No. 6 effective from 2-7-1979, No. 7 effective from 6-7-1979, No. 8 effective from 12-7-1979 and No. 14 effective from 28-11-1979, in so far as these pertained to the `Inserts'. Under an order dated 28-4-1980/2-5-1980, reclassification proposed under the Show Cause Notices was confirmed. That is to say, the `Inserts' were classified under T.I. No. 62 as `Tools Tips'. 2.Being aggrieved, the appellants filed an appeal registered as Appeal No. 1982/80 (F. No. V. 2 (62) 1982/80). Besides this appeal, there were two other appeals, one registered as Appeal No. 2218/80 (F. No. V2 (51A) 2218/80), against the Order No. V-51A(17) 131/VC/80, dated 10-7-1980, passed by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Nasik, by which he confirmed the demand for differential duty (as a result of reclassification) in respect of the `Inserts' cleared from April, 1976 to December, 1978. The ot....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... are that both Tool Tips as well as Throw Away Inserts are made from carbide powder of the metals such as tungsten, molybdenum and vanadium. Both are pressed into the required shapes and then sintered (heat treated). Both are affixed on the tool handle and perform the function of machining of metals (turning and milling etc.). Thus, both are tools. So far as the differences between Tool Tips and Throw Away Inserts are concerned, the appellants gave an imposing list of 10 points of difference. The Bench asked them to show the authorities and technical literature etc. on which these points of difference were based. The appellants were not able to produce any. The points of difference between Tool Tips and Throw Away Inserts, as understood by us on the basis of the samples, catalogues and Indian Standard Specifications etc. shown to us are as under :- The Inserts are clamped on the tool handle and are(i) detachable. The Tool Tips are brazed (welded or soldered) on the tool handle. The Inserts are pre-ground (sharpened) before clearance(ii) from the factory. Tool Tips are ground after they are welded on the tool handle. Inserts have multiple edges. When one edge is blunted, th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....c character and use, the Inserts are nothing more than a separate species of the generic item `Tool Tips'." 8.The Tribunal concluded that Throw Away Inserts, being a variety of the generic item Tool Tips, had to be classified as specific Item 62 and could not fall under the more generic Item 51A(iii) -`Tools'. 9.Aggrieved by the decision of the Tribunal, the appellants have now come up to this Court and contend that Carbide Throw Away Inserts, manufactured by the appellants, fell under Item 51A(iii) of the Central Excise Tariff and not under Item 62, as held by the Tribunal. The relevant Tariff Items, as they stood at the relevant time, were as under :- Tools designed to be fitted into hand tools, machine"51A(iii) tools or tools falling under sub-item (ii), including dies for wire drawing, extrusion dies for metals and rock drilling bits;" Tool Tips, in any form or size, unmounted, of sintered"62. carbides of metals such as tungsten, molybdenum and vanadium." 10.A distinction has been drawn between `Tools, designed to be fitted in hand tools, machine tools and tools of other specified categories' under one heading, `Tool Tips in any form or size' under the other head....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r variety is known by a particular name in the market will not take it out of the general heading. For example, when duty is leviable on biscuits, then every variety of biscuits will be taxed under that heading. A particular type of thin crisp biscuits is known in the market as `wafer', but basically it is a biscuit. It was held by the Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of International Foods v. Collector of Central Excise, Hyderabad, 1978 (2) E.L.T. (J 50), that `wafer' was a kind of biscuit, although it may be different in size and shape from an ordinary biscuit. A pear-shaped drinking glass with a small opening is known as `snifter'. Because of that, `snifter' will not cease to be a drinking glass. To decide the question, whether Throw Away Inserts are Tool Tips, nature and function of Inserts will have to be examined. The form or size of the Inserts are quite immaterial for this purpose. From the finding of fact recorded by the departmental authorities and the Tribunal, it appears that the basic character, function and use of an Insert is not different in any way from a Tool Tip. 14.The finding of the Department which has been upheld by the Tribunal is that both Tool Tips....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the Central Excise Tariff, the only reasonable conclusion can be that it encompassed Throw Away Tips or Inserts as well. IS : 4022-1967 has remained current till about three months ago. The appellants state that the revised Specification has dropped the name `Tips' for Inserts. We have not been shown the revised Specification, but even if it is so, it can only mean that a different name has been given to Throw Away type of Tips. There has, however, been no change in the character or use of the article." 16.The assessee has been unable to bring to the notice of the Court anything to show that the nature and function or composition of a Throw Away Insert is in any way different from an ordinary Tool Tip. The highest that can be said for the appellants is that a Throw Away Insert is a detachable Tool Tip with multiple edges. 17.We were also referred to the judgment of this Court in the case of Plasmac Machine Manufacturing Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, Bombay, 1991 (51) E.L.T. 161 (SC) = (1991) Supp. 1 SCC 57. In that case, the question was whether `Tie Bar Nuts' of base metal or alloys manufactured with the aid of power and having `acme threads', could be class....