Kafila Forge Ltd Vs Principal Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Delhi)
CESTAT Delhi held that Universal Joints Parts to be used in transmission shaft, are more specifically covered under sub heading 8483 60 90 and not under heading 8708.
Facts- M/s Kafila Forge Ltd. (the appellant) filed a Bill of Entry No. 7800127 dated 13.12.2006 for clearance of goods declared as “U.J. Cross Part & U J Cross Cup part” claiming the classification to be under heading 8483 60 90 of the Customs Tariff. These goods weighed 24241.900 kgs and the assessable value was declared to be Rs. 31,63,822.01/-. The assessing officer objected the classification and passed an order classifying the said goods under CTH 8708 of the Customs Tariff. The appellant filed an appeal before the Commissioner(Appeals), who vide the impugned order upheld the said Order-in-Original.
Conclusion- Held that on comparison of the both the heading 8483 and 8708, the impugned goods i.e. Universal Joints Parts to be used in transmission shaft, are more specifically covered under sub heading 8483 60 90 whereas nothing specific is found in respect of these goods under the heading 8708.
FULL TEXT OF THE CESTAT DELHI ORDER
The dispute, in the present appeal, arose when M/s Kafila Forge Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the appellant) filed a Bill of Entry No. 7800127 dated 13.12.2006 for clearance of goods declared as “U.J. Cross Part & U J Cross Cup part” claiming the classification to be under heading 8483 60 90 of the Customs Tariff. These goods weighed 24241.900 kgs and the assessable value was declared to be Rs. 31,63,822.01/-. The assessing officer objected the classification and passed an order No. 08/2017/DC/ICD/TKD dated 11.01.2017 classifying the said goods under CTH 8708 of the Customs Tariff. The appellant filed an appeal before the Commissioner(Appeals), who vide the impugned order upheld the said Order-in-Original.
2. The learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that the classification of the impugned goods is not a fresh one but has been classified since long only in the tariff entry of 8483 specifically. He pointed out that various notifications issued by the Central Government also classifies Universal Joints under the heading 8483 in respect of its use in motor vehicles or in a machine. He relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in Collector of Customs, Bangalore versus Maestro Motors Ltd [2004(12)TMI 86-SC)] wherein it has been held that such Universal Joints are not classifiable as motor vehicle parts. He submitted that the heading clearly includes Universal Joints which is part of Transmission Shafts and Cranks. He drew the attention of the bench to the Note 2(b) of Section XVI of the Customs Tariff dealing with Chapter 87, which states Parts of Universal Joint Cross and parts of Universal Joint Cross suitable for use solely or principally with the said transmission shaft are also classified with the transmission shaft i.e., under heading CTH 8483. It is not disputed that the goods being imported by the appellants are for use solely or principally with the transmission shafts which may be used in motor vehicles. He relied on the order of the Tribunal reported in [2004(167)ELT 343-Tri-Del] in their own case.
3. The learner authorised representative stated that appellant’s contention that the subject goods are covered under 8483 is intended to evade customs duty. The Chapter Heading 8483 essentially relates to transmission shafts, whereas they had declared the goods as parts suitable for use as part of motor vehicles. He drew attention to Part F of the Explanation three notes for CTH 8708 which includes other transmission parts and components (for example propeller shafts, half shafts, here’s, gearing, plain shafts bearings, reduction gear assemblies, universal joints) but the heading excludes crankshafts, camshafts and flywheel of heading 8483. He stated that the HSN explanatory notes have a persuasive value for determining the right classification. The self declaration by the appellant that these are parts to be used as parts of motor vehicle is material evidence and cannot be denied at this stage. The submission of Counsel that it is a general part which can be used anywhere is irrelevant as the subject goods shall only be used in motor vehicles as has been stated by the appellant before the Commissioner (Appeals). In order to find the right classification, it is description of goods as well as the test of predominance that matters as, has been held in catena of decisions. The learned Authorised Representative relied on recent judgement in Westinghouse Saxby farmers Ltd vs. Commissioner of Central Excise Calcutta [MANU/SC/0162/2021].
4. Having heard both sides, the issue to be decided is classification of the goods, namely U.J. Crossparts, U.J. Cross Body, U.J. Cross Cup, U.J. Cross Needly Roller, U.J. Cross SNAP Ring. We observe that the usage of these goods is not in dispute in as much as these goods are for use solely or principally with the Transmission Shafts which may be used in Motor Vehicles. It is an admitted fact by the appellant- that universal joints or parts of universal joint and transmission parts fall under Tariff Entry No. 8483. The goods imported are Universal Joint parts to be used in Transmission Shafts. Transmission Shafts are further used in automobiles. Transmission shafts are classifiable under CTH 8483.
5. In order to appreciate the coverage of the goods falling under heading 8483 of the Customs Tariff Act, the same is reproduced below:
” 8483 TRANSMISSION SHAFTS (INCLUDING CAM SHAFTS AND CRANK SHAFTS) AND CRANKS; BEARING HOUSINGS AND PLAIN SHAFT BEARINGS; GEARS AND GEARING; BALL OR ROLLER SCREWS; GEAR BOXES AND OTHER SPEED CHANGERS, INCLUDING TORQUE CONVERTERS; FLYWHEELS AND PULLEYS, INCLUDING PULLEY BLOCK; CLUTCHES AND SHAFT COUPLINGS (INCLUDING UNIVERSAL JOINTS)
