1996(05)LCX0113

IN THE CEGAT, COURT NO. II, NEW DELHI

S/Shri S.L. Peeran, Member (J) and J.H. Joglekar, Member (T)

COLLR. OF CUSTOMS, BOMBAY

Versus

NEW TECH TOOL MANUFACTURERS CO.

Final Order Nos. C/201-214/96-B, dated 31-5-1996 in Appeal Nos. C/128/86-B2, C/2815-2817//89-B2, C/2230-2233/89-B2, C/3865-3868/88-B2, C/3869/88-B2 and C/3440/90-B2

Cases Quoted

Moorco (India) Ltd. v. Collector — 1994(09)LCX0102 Eq 1994 (074) ELT 0005 (SC)                                                   [Para 7]

Collector v. New Tech Tools Mfg. Co. — Order No. C/209/95-B2, dated 2-5-1995            [Para 7]

Winter Misra Diamond Tools Ltd. v. Collector — 1996(02)LCX0147 Eq 1996 (083) ELT 0670 (Tribunal)      [Paras 7, 23]

Collector v. Rajasthan Udyog — 1995(03)LCX0067 Eq 1995 (078) ELT 0019 (Tribunal)                                    [Paras 7, 25]

Gujarat Steel Tube Indus. v. Collector — 1994(02)LCX0090 Eq 1994 (071) ELT 0756 (Tribunal)                      [Para 7, 26]

Collector v. Manjushree Minerals Ltd. — 1992(10)LCX0045 Eq 1993 (064) ELT 0085 (Tribunal)                      [Paras 7, 27]

Granite (India) v. Collector — 1990(05)LCX0079 Eq 1990 (050) ELT 0536 (Tribunal)                                      [Paras 7, 28]

Collector v. Deejay Neelam Marble Indus                                                                             [Para 24]

Advocated By : Shri A.T. Usman, JDR, for the Appellant.

Shri A.S. Sunder Rajan, Consultant, for the Respondents.

[Order]. - In all the appeals common question of law and facts are involved, hence they are taken up together for disposal as per law.

2. The importer imported `Carbide Tipped Circular Saws’. The same was assessed under Item 82.01/04 of Customs Tariff Act, 1975. They filed refund claims seeking reassessment under Item 82.06 of Customs Tariff Act, 1975, which was rejected by Assistant Collector. However, Collector (Appeals) on appeal has held the same to be classifiable under Heading 84.45 of the CTA, 75. Aggrieved by these orders, Revenue has come up in appeal.

3. In importers’ appeal (C/2815-2817/88-B2) the item imported is `Tungsten Carbide Tipped Circular Saw Blades’. The same had been assessed under 8202.99. They filed refund claim seeking reassessment under Heading No. 82.08, which was rejected on the ground that the said heading covers “Knives and Cutting Blades”. The Collector (Appeals) has confirmed this finding and hence importer has filed separate appeals. Thus, there are set of appeals of Revenue, seeking restoration of assessment under Heading 82.01/04, on the ground that Heading 84.45/48, is not relevant and importer had also not sought the assessment under this heading. It is also stated that the imported item `Circular Saw Blades’ have to be operated by machine tools and were not capable of being used as hand tools, since they had to revolve at speed of 1000 to 2000 RPM. The goods are saw blades and the blades for hand and machine saws (including toothless saw blades) are specifically covered by Description of Heading 82.01/04 itself.

4. The importers, contention in their appeal is that the imported goods are machine tools (carbide tipped circular saw blades) which are used in machine for working upon and cutting metal, wood, etc. and therefore, for its classification Chapter 82.08 would be more appropriate and specific. The goods are cutting blades for machine with or without mechanical appliances and are known and understood in the trade as such. It is also alternatively pleaded that Chapter 84.66 could also be considered as `parts solely and princi- pally used with the machine’ under Heading 84.65, would fall under 84.65.

5.  The Collector (Appeals) has held that the workability on the machine being a common feature, the dictionary meaning of the word “Saw” makes it clear that it refers to an implement with variously shaped blade or edge having teeth of various forms or attached to it. He has held that in the item in question, the teeth is cut into the circular metal and tipped with carbide, and hence it meets the requirement of blades for sawing of all kinds. He has observed that blade for cutting metal or wood may not necessarily have teeth on its edges. Referring to explanatory notes under 82.08, the learned Collector has held that the note also does not refer to the words “Sawing” by means of an edge cut into teeth. Therefore, he has held that Heading 82.08 does not have as much a claim as Heading 82.02, which specifically refers to blades for `Saw’ and therefore, upheld the classification under Heading 82.02, in preference to the importer’s claim under 82.08.

6. We have heard Shri A.T. Usman, the learned DR for the department and Shri A.S. Sunder Rajan, the learned Consultant for the respondents.

7. Shri Usman submitted that the issue regarding the classification of the item in question has since been decided and even reference to the larger bench has also been answered. It is his submission that the ratio of the following judgments would clearly apply to the facts of the present case and hence the Revenue’s classification of the item in question is required to be upheld. The citations referred to by the learned DR are :

(i) Granite (India) v. Collector of Customs [1990 (050) ELT 536]

(ii) Gujarat Steel Tube Indus. v. Collector of Customs [1994 (071) ELT 756]

(iii) Collector of Customs v. Manjushree Mineral Ltd. [1993 (064) ELT 85]

(iv) Collector of Customs, Bombay v. Rajasthan Udyog [1995 (078) ELT l9]

(v) Moorco (India) Ltd. v. Collector of Customs [1994 (074) ELT 5]

(vi) Winter Misra Diamond Tools Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise [1996(02)LCX0147 Eq 1996 (083) ELT 0670 (Tri.) = 1996 (013) RLT 450]

(vii) Collector of Customs, Bombay v. New Tech Tools Mfg. Co. (Order No. C/209/95-B2, dated 2-5-1995).

8. The learned Consultant sought to distinguish the citations and prayed for remand of the case to establish the classification under Heading 82.06.

9. We have carefully considered the submissions and have perused the records. It is noticed that the Revenues’ appeals deal with Bill of Entry dated 21-2-1983 and 26-2-1983 which has been decided by order-in-original dated 20-2-1985. The original assessment was under 82.01/04 of CTA, 1975. The importer claimed for reassessment under Heading 82.06, which reads as :

“Knives and cutting blades, for machines or for mechanical appliances.”

10. The Heading 82.01/04 of CTA, 1975 reads as :

However, the Collector (Appeals) reassessed the item under Heading 84.45/48 which reads :

(Machine-tools for working metal or metal carbides, . . . . . . accessories and parts suitable for use solely or principally with the above machine-tools, including work and tool-holders, etc. etc.)

The appellants had not claimed assessment nor the lower authorities had assessed under Chapter 84. Hence the Revenue is seeking restoration of assessment under Chapter 82.02.

11. In appeal C/2230-2233/89-B2 the Bill of Entry in (question are dated 19-1-1988 and 15-1-1988 which has been dealt with in order-in-original dated 8-3-1988. The original assessment was under sub-heading 8202.99; Bill of Entry dated 21-9-1987 and 16-7-1987 was dealt with in order-in-original 21-4-1988. The Assistant Collector has upheld the original assessment under Chapter sub-heading 8202.20. The Collector (Appeals) by a common order upheld the classification under Chapter Heading 82.02, without going into classification under specific sub-heading. The importer’s claim, however, had been under 82.06.

12. In Appeal No. C/3440/90-B2 the Bill of Entry in question is dated 31-7-1989, dealt with in order-in-original dated 4-1-1990. The department has assessed the claim under Chapter sub-heading 8202.99 as against Chapter sub-heading 82.08 of Customs Tariff 1988, which corresponds to 82.06 of CTA, 1975.

13. In Appeal No. C/3865-3869/88-B2, the Collector (Appeals) has dealt with 5 appeals arising from orders-in-original dated 15-4-1987, 13-7-1987 and 17-11-1986. The original assessment had been under 8201/04 of CTA, 1975 as against the claim of 82.06 of CTA, 1975 and 8208 of CTA, 1986 respectively.

14. Section XV covers Chapter 82. Section note 1(a) to (n) describes all the items that would not fall within the ambit of Section XV. The item in question does not fall in any of the Note 1 (a) to 1 (n) and hence the item is not excluded from Section XV. Note 2 of Section XV reads :

“2. Parts of base metal of the articles falling in the headings of this Chapter are to be classified with the articles of which they are parts, except parts separately specified as such and tool-holders for hand tools (Heading No. 84.45/48). However, parts of general use as defined in Note 2 to Section XV are in all cases excluded from this chapter.

Cutting plates for electric hair clippers and blades and heads for electric shavers are to be classified under Heading No. 82.08/15."

Note 1 and 2 of Chapter 82 are relevant for reference. Note 1, inter alia states, this chapter covers only articles with a blade, working edge, working surface or other working part off :

(a) base metal ;

(b) metal carbides ;

(c) precious or semi-precious stones (natural, synthetic or reconstructed) on a support of base metal ; or

(d) abrasive materials on a support of base metal, provided that the articles have cutting teeth flutes, grooves, or the like, of base metal, which retain their identity and function after the application of the abrasive.

As can be seen from these notes, it is clear that parts of general use as defined in Note 2 to Section XV are in all cases excluded from Chapter 82. It also excludes parts separately specified as such.

The item in question not being a part of general use and also not being a part separately specified, hence it is not excluded from Chapter 82 of CTA, 1975.

Heading 82.01/04 of CTA, 1975 inter alia deals with parts of, machine tools; portable forges; grinding wheels with frame works (hand or pedal operated)

Heading 8206 of CTA, 1975 deals with Knives and cutting blades for machines or for mechanical appliances.

Now, it has to be seen as to whether the item in question “Carbide Tipped Circular Saws” is a “part of machine tool” for classification under heading 82.01/04 of CTA, 1975 or “knife & cutting blade”, for machine.

15. The importer has produced technical literature of the item. It reads as follows :

“SUZUKI Tungsten Carbide Tipped Saws are of highest precision and are well known all over the world. Produced on most modern automatic machine tools, these saws are checked for truth of rotation. Bore size is to SA H7 tolerance. Every saw is dynamically balanced and tested for its cutting quality. Selection of the best raw materials is one of the prime concerns to guarantee quality of the product.

Though introduced in India in recent times, these saws have found a very receptive and expanding market. Cutting applications for these saws are numerous and extremely varied. They are used in wood, veneered boards, chip boards, particle boards, hard board, plywood, compressed wood, laminated boards, plastics - PVC, acrylic, nylon, laminated sheets, bakelite, asbestos, brake lining, cement boards, soft refractory, non-ferrous materials like alumi-nium copper, brass, bronze, lead, magnesium etc. They have also been found suitable for cutting glass epoxy laminates, copper clad laminates and fibre glass material."

16. From the reading of the entire literature, it follows that the item has cutting appliances of various materials as shown above. The point that is required to be seen is as to whether it is a part of machine tool or used as “a knife or cutting blade for machine”. Except the technical literature, there is nothing much on record to come to the conclusion that it is of either type.

17. The lower authorities have gone by the dictionary meaning of the term “Saw” and by reading Page 1104 of HSN to classify it under Heading 82.02. The new Tariff is aliegned to HSN notes and the same is not relevant for our consideration for classifying the item under CTA, 1975.

18. The department has classified the item under new Tariff under sub-heading 8202.20, as “Band Saw blades - Circular Saw blades (including slitting or slothing saw blades) as well as Heading 8202.99 as ”Other".

19.  The HSN note at Page 1104 quoted by the lower authorities pertains to “Circular Saw blades”. It reads as follows :

“(B) (2) Circular saw blades (including slitting or slotting saw blades for use on milling machines). The latter can be distinguished from milling cutters by the ratio of thickness to diameter which is less than for milling cutters, and by the toothing which is cut only on the periphery as with ordinary circular saws, whereas milling cutters often have teeth on their faces, or have concave or convex teeth.”

20. The HSN note at Page 1111 under Heading 82.08-Knives and cutting blades, for machines for mechanical appliances reads :

This heading applies to unmounted knives or cutting blades, rectangular, circular or of other shapes, for machines or for mechanical appliances. It does not, however, cover cutting blades or knives for the hand tools of heading 82.01 to 82.05 (e.g., plane irons).

The heading includes knives or cutting blades :

(1) For metal Working :

(a) Blades and knives for fitting into tools for machine-tools, e.g., into reamers or milling cutters.

(b) Blades for guillotine-type shears or for machine shears for cutting sheet metal, wire, bars, etc.

(2) For wood Working :

(a) Blades and irons for planing or similar wood working machines.

(b) Blades for veneer cutting machines.

(3) For Kitchen appliances or for machines used by the food industry, such as blades and cutters for appliances or machines used in the household, or by butchers, bakers, etc. (e.g., blades for mincing machines, vegetable choppers, bread slicers, bacon or ham slicers).

(4) For agricultural, horticultural or forestry machines, for example, blades and knives for root cutters, straw cutters, etc. or for lawn mowers; blades and segments of blades for harvesting or reaping machines. The heading does not, however, cover coulters for ploughs or discs for horrows.

(5) For other machines or mechanical appliances, such as :

(a) Blades and knives, including circular or cup-shaped blades, for machines used in splitting, paring or trimming the surface of leather.

(b) Blades and knives for machines for cutting paper, textiles, plastics, etc.; for tobacco shredding machines, etc."

As can be seen from the reading of HSN note at Page 1104 and 1111, . . . . under “Circular saw blades” . . . . it clarifies that the such blades are used on milling machines and also distinguishes it from “milling cutters” by the ratio of thickness to diameter, which is less than for milling cutters. It follows that the circular saw blades used only in milling machine fall under heading 82.02 as a “Hand Tools” or “Pars” of machine Tools.

21. While Heading 82.06 of old Tariff corresponding to 8208 of New Tariff applies to “Knives and cutting blades” for machines or for mechanical appliances, which are used by the food industry; Blades and knives for machines for cutting paper, textiles, plastics, etc. etc. The Knives or cutting blades can be of rectangular, circular or of other shapes. The distinction between 82.02 and 82.06 (8208) is that 8202 refers to “Hand Saws”, Blades for saws of all kinds (including slitting, slotting or toothless saw blades, which includes the Band Saw blades, circular saw blades, chain saw blades, straight saw blades, for working metal. The saws can be both of hand saws and for machines and for all materials. While 8206 (8208) refers to knives and cutting blades.

22. The item in question admittedly is not a `knife or a blade’ but `Carbide Tipped Circular Saws’. Therefore, the description of the item itself makes it plain that it is not a knife or blade but a `circular saw’ . . . . It is used as a cutting appliances, hence it clearly fits in the description of sub-heading 8202.20 and not under sub-heading 8202.90 or 8206 of CTA, 1975 or 8208 of CTA, 1986. Thus the claim of the importer under Chapter sub-heading 8206 or 8208 is required to be rejected.

23. In Winter Misra Diamond Tools Ltd.’s case diamond impregnated segments, were welded on alloy steel plates, which in turn were used in the sawing machines. It was held to be rightly classifiable under Chapter Heading 82.02 of CTA, 1986.

24. In Collector of Customs, Bombay v. M/s. Deejay Neelam Marble Indus. case, the item “steel saw blades and diamond impregnated segments” were held correctly classifiable under 82.01/04 and 82.07 respectively.

25. In Collector of Customs, Bombay v. Rajasthan Udyog, `saw blades bodies’ for attachment of Diamonds segments were held classifiable under Heading 82.01/04 of CTA, 1975.

26. In the case of Gujarat Steel Tubes Inds. dealt with the question of grant of the benefit of Notification No. 69/87, with regard to the item circular saw blades (friction types).

27. In Collector of Customs v. Manjushree Minerals Ltd. Blades for cutting instruments were found to attachment to saw and hence its classification under Heading 82.01/04 of CTA, 1975 was upheld.

28. In Granite (India) Ltd. case Gang saw Blades were held classifiable under Heading 82.01/04 of CTA, 1975.

29. Thus, the claim of the importer is rejected and as a result their appeals are dismissed and the Revenue’s claim is accepted and thus the Revenue appeals are allowed.

_______

Equivalent 1997 (90) ELT 143 (Tribunal)