Ctr Manufacturing Industries Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Ctr Manufacturing Industries vs Commissioner of Central Excise

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai Decided Apr 01, 2003

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/30507

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/30507
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Judge: K Kumar, S T C.
Decided On: Apr 01, 2003
Subject: Service Tax

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Service Tax

Key legal issue: Service Tax

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Ctr Manufacturing Industries

Respondent

Commissioner of Central Excise

Legal References

Reported In: (2003)(156)ELT990Tri(Mum.)bai

Excerpt

1. heard both sides. the issue involved in this case is whether switches of various kinds are to be classified under heading 8535/8536 depending on the voltage or to be classified under heading 8504 as part of transformers (tap changer). in addition to the case laws cited before the commissioner (appeals), the appellants rely on the decision in the case of cc v. kumudam publications (p) ltd. - 1997 (96) e.l.t.226 (s.c) which held that, "it may not also be entirely correct to say that in no case can the end use or function of the goods is relevant on the question of classification." however, we find that while passing the impugned order, the commissioner (appeals) has classified the product under heading 8535/8536 not only going by the specific entry in the tariff but has also taken into account the function of the impugned goods. as such, we find that there is no case for interference with the order passed by the lower authority.

Full Judgment

1. Heard both sides. The issue involved in this case is whether switches of various kinds are to be classified under Heading 8535/8536 depending on the voltage or to be classified under Heading 8504 as part of transformers (Tap Changer). In addition to the case laws cited before the Commissioner (Appeals), the appellants rely on the decision in the case of CC v. Kumudam Publications (P) Ltd. - 1997 (96) E.L.T.226 (S.C) which held that, "It may not also be entirely correct to say that in no case can the end use or function of the goods is relevant on the question of classification." However, we find that while passing the impugned order, the Commissioner (Appeals) has classified the product under Heading 8535/8536 not only going by the specific entry in the Tariff but has also taken into account the function of the impugned goods. As such, we find that there is no case for interference with the order passed by the lower authority.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumb... Same Parties Ctr Manufacturing Industries vs Commissioner of Central Excise Same Subject Service Tax Same Judge K Kumar, S T C.