1997(09)LCX0050

IN THE CEGAT, COURT NO. II, NEW DELHI

Ms. Jyoti Balasundaram, Member (J) and Shri S.K. Dhar, Member (T)

HIMSON TEXTILE ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES LTD.

Versus

COLLR. OF C. EX., BOMBAY

Final Order No. E/1357/97-B1, dated 22-9-1997 in Appeal No. E/2148/89-B1

Advocated By : None, for the Appellants.

Shri D.S. Negi, SDR, for the Respondent.

[Order per : Jyoti Balasundaram, Member (J)]. - The above appeal arises out of the order passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) classifying (i) Electric Control Panel (2) Electric Panel Board and (3) Electronic Integrated Circuit and Micro Assemblies under Chapter 85 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. Item No. 1 and 2 enumerated above have been classified under sub-heading 85.37 while Item No. 3 has been classified under sub-heading 85.42. It is the contention of the appellants who are manufacturers of Draw texturising machines that the items in dispute are components specially designed and exclusively used in the manufacture of Draw texturising machines and therefore, had to be classified under Heading 84.48 which covers Auxiliary machinery for use with machines of Heading 84.44, 84.45, 84.46 or 84.47 (84.44 covers Machines for extruding, drawing, texturing or cutting man-made textile materials; 84.45 covers Machines for preparing textile fibres, spinning, doubling or twisting machines; 84.46 covers Weaving machines and 84.47 covers Knitting machines, stitch-bonding machines etc.).

2. We have heard Shri D.S. Negi, learned DR and perused the records as the appellants have sought for a decision on merits. We find that the Collector (Appeals) has rightly applied Note 2(a) of Section 16 of the Tariff according to which parts of machines which are in themselves goods included in any of the Heading of Chapter 84 or 85 (other than Heading 84.45 and 85.48) are in all cases to be classified under respective headings - the Electric Control Panels and Electric Panel Boards are goods specified under Heading 85.37 while Intergrated circuits are specified under Heading 85.42. Therefore, classification as determined by the department by applying Note 2(a) to Section XVI is correct. Resort cannot be had to Rule 2(b) where Rule 2(a) itself covers the goods in dispute.

In the light of the above discussion, we see no infirmity in the order passed by the lower Appellate Authority uphold the same and reject the appeal.

Equivalent 1997 (95) ELT 519 (Tribunal)