Judgment:
1. In these two appeals the issue being common they are taken-up together.
2. Briefly the dispute is on the question of classification of Laminations under Central Excise Tariff for the purposes of determination of rate of Additional duty of Customs (CVD). It is not disputed that as far as the classification of the same product under the Customs Tariff Act is concerned, it was classified under Heading 8504.90 as parts of Electrical Transformers.
3. Heard Shri G. Sampath, learned Advocate for appellants. He submits that a corresponding sub-heading is not available in the Central Excise Tariff. He submits that the classification even under the Central Excise Tariff would continue to remain under Heading 85.04 because these laminations are to be regarded solely for use as parts of the transformers which is to be manufactured by the appellants for use in C-DOT telephone exchange equipment. He submits that these transformers are not normal power transformers but are used on electrical circuit designed by C-DOT and deal with Micro voltage or very low voltage current. He submits that the goods have been ordered for import as per the exact design and specifications required for this purpose and are not capable of any general or interchangeable use. In this connection, he cites the decision of the Tribunal vide Final Order No. 1407/98, dated 24-7-1998 in the case of Sri Ganesh Gears (P) Ltd. wherein the Tribunal held that gears, pinions etc. which have been specifically designed only for use as original equipment in motor vehicles, would be classifiable under Chapter Heading 87.08 and not under Heading 84.83 as a general use item. He submits that the same principle is applicable in this case and takes support of Section Note 2(b) of Section XVI of Central Excise Tariff . He also cites the case of C.C.E. v. Mahendra Engg. Works as in 1993 (67) E.L.T. 134 (T) wherein itjvas held that stampings and laminations for use in electrical motors which are again used in the manufacture of power driven pumps would be classifiable as parts of power driven pumps under Heading 84.13 and would therefore be eligible to benefit of Notification No. 64/86 . He prays that the same principle should be applied in this case also.
4. Heard learned DR who submits that the issue is clearly covered by Section Note l(j) of Section XVI which holds that Section XVI does not apply at all to articles which are clearly mentioned under Chapter 82 or 83. Since electrical stampings and laminations are specifically mentioned under Chapter 83 under Heading 83.12, therefore the said section note would bar the applicability of the entire Section XVI to these goods. Since Chapter 85 falls under Section XVI, therefore on this ground, the classification claimed by the appellants under Chapter 85 would not be available. Instead, Chapter 83 would be the correct classification. He also submits that in view of exclusion mentioned above under Section Note l(j), there is no need to further proceed to Section Note (2) of this Section.
5. We have carefully considered these submissions and records of the case. We find that the issue requiring our consideration is whether laminations made to specific size and specifications imported would be leviable to additional duties of customs (CVD) under Heading 85.04 or they would be classifiable under Heading 83.12 of Central Excise Tariff. While we have considered the ld. Advocate's submissions on the principle that since the items imported are specifically designed for use only in transformers and are not capable of any general use, therefore they should be classified as parts of transformers under Central Excise Tariff Act. Also, we are unable to accept the same for the following reasons :- (1) Section Note l(j) of Section XVI of Central Excise Tariff clearly lays down that Section XVI would not cover articles of Chapter 82 or Chapter 83. As against this, Chapter 83 contains a specific sub-heading 8312.00 which reads as "Electrical stampings and laminations, of base metals, all sorts". It is not denied that the products imported are electrical laminations. Therefore, in view of the exclusion of applicability of Chapter 83 from Chapter 85 of Section XVI vide the said section note, we cannot apply the principle enunciated by learned Advocate as it conflicts with the legal position contained in the said Section.
(2) We are also of the considered view that the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Sri Ganesh Gears (P) Ltd. (supra) is distinguishable to facts or law of this case inasmuch as that in the said decision, the provisions of Section Note 2(a) were applied because same were in consonance with Section Note l(k) of Section XVI. In the present case, the situation is exactly reverse in as much as Section Note l(j) as mentioned above would be applicable and this would not be in consonance with the Section Note 2(b).
Therefore, the facts in law considered in the said final order stands distinguished.C.C.E. v. Mahendra Engg. Works (supra) cited by learned Advocate. In this case, the Tribunal had held that stampings and laminations used for ultimate manufacturer of power driven pumps would be classifiable under Chapter Heading 84.13 and therefore entitled to benefit of Notification No. 64/86-CE., dated 10-2-1986. We cannot accept the submissions of learned Advocate that the same principle should be applied to the present case for the simple reason that in that case the laminations were held to be classifiable under Chapter 84 which is not excluded by Section Note l(j) which only excludes articles under Chapters 82 and 83 . Therefore since the restriction contained in the said Section Note l(j) was not applicable to the facts of that case but is clearly applicable in this case, the said decision of the Tribunal stands distinguished.
6. In view of the aforesaid analysis we do not find any merit in these appeals and same are dismissed.