SooperKanoon Citation | sooperkanoon.com/10230 |
Court | Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi |
Decided On | Oct-15-1996 |
Reported in | (1997)(90)ELT235TriDel |
Appellant | Chamundi Machine Tools Ltd. |
Respondent | Collector of C. Ex. |
2. The matter relates to the classification of the products gears, shafts, pulleys, couplings, claw clutches, pinions, bearing and housing. The appellants had classified these products under Heading No.84.66 which covers the following :- "parts and accessories suitable for housing solely or principally with the machines of Headings No. 84.56 to 84.65, including work or tool holders, self opening die- heads, dividing heads and other special attachments for machine and tool holders for any type of tool for working in the hand".
The department had classified these products under Heading No. 84.83 which covers the following :- "transmission shafts (including cam shafts and crank shafts) and cranks, bearing housing and plain shafts bearings, gears and gearing; ball screws gear boxes and other speed changers including tarque converters, fly wheels and pulleys, including pully blocks; clutches and shaft couplings (including universal joints".
3. The matter was listed for hearing on 15-10-1996. The appellants M/s.
Chamundi Machine Tool Limited had requested for decision in their absence. On behalf of the respondents Revenue Shri M. Jayaraman, ld.JDR briefly explained the facts of the case and submitted that according to the Section Note 2 Under Section XVI of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (the tariff) the parts which are goods included in any of the headings of Chapter 84 [or] Chapter 85 of the Tariff were required to be classified in their respective headings.
It was his submission that as these parts were covered by the description against Heading No. 84.83 they were correctly classifiable there and by virtue of this Section Note their classification under Heading No. 84.66 was automatically ruled out.
5. The appellants were engaged in the manufacture of lathes for removing metal which were classifiable under Heading No. 84.58 of the tariff. Under Heading No. 84.83 specific goods were classified and if any particular item was specifically covered by the description as given against that Heading No. 84.83 they had to be classified there itself. We find that the goods gears, bearings, housings and pulleys are specifically covered by the description against Heading No. 84.83.
6. The Heading No. 84.83 covers transmission shaft (including cam shaft and crank shaft) and cranks. In the classification list the goods have been referred to as shaft, hollow shaft, spline shaft, pinion shaft, claw shaft, operating shaft and control shaft. As the description given in the classification list does not tally with the description under Heading No. 84.83, we consider that these shafts may not be classified under Heading No. 84.83 and will be classifiable under Heading No.84.66 as parts and accessories suitable for use solely or principally with lathe for removing metal. Similarly couplings, claw clutching and pinions are not exactly covered by Heading No. 84.83.
7. In 84.83 clutches and shaft couplings including universal joints are covered but the goods in question are referred to only as couplings and claw clutches. Ld. JDR had stated that the clutches is a general term and it would cover claw clutches also. Similarly, according to him the shaft coupling is a general term and the couplings would be included therein. For both these items we consider that they would be covered under Heading No. 84.83.
8. As regards pinions they are not covered by any of the named goods under Heading No. 84.83 and they should be rightly classified under Heading No. 84.86.
bearings, housings, pulleys, couplings and claw clutches are rightly classified under Heading No. 84.83 while shafts and pinions are classified under Heading No. 84.66 of the tariff. The appellants have also prayed that the demand for 6 months should be calculated from the date of the impugned order-in-appeal. The period of limitation has to be governed by the relevant provisions of Section 11A of the Central Excises and Salt Act, as in force during the relevant time. The date of the order-in-appeal had no bearing on the demand for limitation. This plea of the appellants has no force and is rejected.
11. Subject to the above, the appeal is otherwise rejected and ordered accordingly.