Case Law Details
Technocraft Enterprise Vs C.C. (CESTAT Ahmedabad)
We find that the essential dispute is if the product imported by the appellant falls under Chapter Heading 72249099 or Chapter Heading 73049000.
The appellant is seeking classification of the product as semi-finished product of other alloy steel.
it is seen that only product with solid section are classifiable as semi-finished products. The products which are not of solid section cannot be classified as semi-finished products. In view of above, the classification under Chapter Heading 7224 as semi-finished produce has to be ruled out as the product imported by the appellant is not having solid section. The alternate classification suggested by Revenue is 73049090.
It is seen that the said heading covers tubes, pipes and hollow The Revenue is seeking to classify the product as hollow profile. The appellant have argued that the product tubes and pipes and hollow profiles are products made out of the process of extrusion, whereas the product imported by the appellant is a forged product, which has been proof machine. The argument of the appellant is based on the process of manufacture which has no relevance as far as classification under Chapter Heading 7304 is concerned. It is seen that for the purpose of classification in these heading the process of manufacture is not relevant. The appellant has sought classification of the product as ‘other bars and rods’ relying of Chapter Note (m).
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
