1. O.E.N. India Ltd., Cochin had filed a revision application to the Secretary, Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, New Delhi. The said revision application stands transferred to the Tribunal in terms of the provisions of Section 131B of the Customs Act, 1962 to be disposed of as an appeal.
2. Briefly the facts of the case are that the appellants had imported stainless steel flat wire under Bill of Entry No. 437/28-10-1980 valued at Rs. 47185.50 (CIF). The invoice produced for the clearance of the subject consignment showed the description of the goods as "prime Hard Drawn" stainless steel flat wire with round edge type III Sandvik IIR 51 (301) 0.008 +_ 0.00028" thick, 0.010" _. 0.00032" thick 0.006" __ 0.0002" thick etc. in 0.187" wide coils. As per Notes l(o) of Chapter 73 of BTN wire is defined as cold drawn products of solid section of any cross-sectional shape. The letter dated 30-11-1979 of M/s. OAK Industries Inc., Electronic Division, showed the item as cold rolled (rolled in roll). The technical data sheet produced also indicated Sandvik IIR 51 as rolled strips. The adjudicating authority had observed that the subject goods conform to the definition of strips given in the Notes l(m) of the Chapter 73 of BTN, and that the goods were classifiable under Heading 73.15(2) of Customs Tariff Act and read with relevant notifications were assessable to duty @ 220% AV + Countervailing duty @ Rs. 325/- per M.T. The goods as per invoice description were classifiable under Heading 73.15(1) CTA and read with relevant notifications are assessable to duty only @ 35% AV + AD 5% -I- CV @ Rs. 165/- per M.T. The appellants had contended that the imported goods were classifiable under Heading 73.15(1) CTA whereas the revenue's view was that the same were stainless steel strips. The learned Collector had held that the goods are classifiable under Heading 73.15(2) of the Customs Tariff and would be covered by Serial No. 24 of Appendix 8 of ITC Policy. He further observed that the appellants made mis-declaration as*to the description of the goods and the licence produced by the appellants was not valid. He had confiscated the goods under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962. He had further directed that the goods can be redeemed on payment of fine of Rs. 5000/-. Being aggrieved from the aforesaid order the appellant had filed an appeal to the Central Board of Excise and Customs. The Hon'ble Board had held that the geods were covered by the Import Licence and had quashed the finding of fine in lieu of confiscation.
For classification the Board had observed that their order was without prejudice to the decision that may have been taken on the correct classification of the goods under the Customs Tariff. Being aggrieved from the aforesaid order the appellants had filed a revision application to the Central Government which stands transferred to the Tribunal to be disposed of as an appeal. A notice of hearing was sent to the appellants per registered post. The appellants have intimated that the matter may be decided on merits. In para number 4 of the written arguments the appellants have mentioned that the merits of the matter are discussed in the revision application.
3. Shri J. Gopinath the learned S.D.R. who has appeared on behalf of the respondents has reiterated the facts. He has referred to invoice which appears on page 10 of the Paper Book. He has pleaded that the appellants had imported cold rolled stainless steel strips and it is an admitted fact. He has further pleaded that the appellants had claimed assessment under Heading 73.15(1) and had relied on Note l(o) of Chapter 73 whereas the revenue wants its classification under 73.15(2) and the revenue had relied on Note l(m) to Chapter 73. Shri Gopinath has pleaded that the appellant's contention that for classification purpose it does not make any difference whether it is cold rolled or hard drawn is not acceptable as there is substantial difference. In support of his arguments he has referred to a judgment of the Delhi High Court in the case of Super Traders and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors. reported in 1983 ELT 258. He has laid special emphasis on para numbers 4 and 5 of the said judgment. He states that in para number 4 the Hon'ble High Court had observed that Iron and Steel articles are covered under Chapter 73 of First Schedule to 1975 Act. Heading No.73.15 relates to alloy steel. Stainless steel being alloy steel falls under this heading. In para number 5 the Hon'ble High Court had held that Heading 73.13 deals with sheets and plates of iron and steel. But sheets in terms of Clause (n) of Note 1 of Chapter 73 is to be taken to apply to sheets which have been cut to non-rectangular shape. Since the petitioner was importing stainless steel circle which really means sheet cut to non-rectangular shape. So there does not seem to be any justification to say as to why stainless steel circles would not be included in 73.15(2) read with 73.13, Clause (n) of Note 1 of Chapter 73. Shri Gopinath states that the classification made by the lower authorities was correct in law and the appeal filed by the appellants needs to be dismissed.
4. We have heard both the sides and have gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. It is an admitted fact that the appellants had imported cold rolled stainless steel strips which have been described in the invoice as stainless steel flat wire of three types.
The details of the same are as under :- In inches In mm Width Thickness Heading 73.15 relates to alloy steel and high carbon steel in the forms mentioned in Heading Nos. 73.06/07 to 73.14 and sub-heading (1) relates to "Not elsewhere specified" and sub-heading (2) relates to coils for re-rolling, bars (including bright bars), rods, wire rods, wire circles, angles, shapes and sections strips, sheets and plates of stainless steel.
5. A simple perusal of the description of the goods read with Note l(m) Chapter 73 shows that the imported goods are strips. Accordingly we hold that the lower authorities had correctly assessed the imported goods under sub-heading (2) of Heading 73.15. In the result there is no merit in the appeal. The appeal is dismissed.