ORDER
S.S. Kang, Member (J)
1. These appeals involve a common issue and hence are being taken up together for final disposal.
2. Appeal No. 4852/92-B1 (sic) and Appeal No. 4954/92-B1 (sic) are filed against the common-order in appeal dated 18-6-1992 passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) Delhi. In the impugned order the coiled cords manufactured by the appellant were ordered to be classifiable under Heading 85.44 of the Central Excise Tariff whereas the appellant claimed classification under Tariff Heading 8517.00 of Central Excise Tariff.
3. In pursuance of the order classifying the goods under Heading 85.44 demand was raised and confirmed against M/s. Fixwell Pushincords (P) Ltd. by the adjudicating authority. In appeal the demand was confirmed. Against this order Appeal No. 3/94-B1 was filed by M/s. Fixwell Pushincords (P) Ltd.
4. The issue involved in these appeals is in respect of classification of coiled cords manufactured by the appellant.
5. Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of Delton Cables Ltd. submitted that the appellants are manufacturing the telephone coiled cord which is a P.V.C. insultated tinsel thread fitted between the receiver and the main telephone apparatus. This coiled cord is made out of tinsel conductor which due to its high rate of resistance is unsuitable for use as an electric conductor. This coil cord is made out of several strands of thin ribbon type alloy which are twisted together to form tinsel conductor as an un-insulated voice coil lead wire. The wire is insulated to protect from damage.
6. He submits that the manufacture of coil is not considered to be complete unless the same is cut into requisite length, coiled around an iron rod to be put into heat chamber to give it a permanent shape and this coil is fitted with terminals at both ends. This coil is not sold in running length as in the case of wires, cables and conductors. This coiled cords are used solely and principally with telephone only.
7. He submitted that in the case of appellants Section Note 2(b) of Section XVI is applicable and the coiled cords are classifiable under Tariff Heading 8517.00 of the Central Excise Tariff.
8. Ms. Ginny Bedi, on behalf of M/s. Fixwell Pushincords also submits that in appellant’s own case the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) Delhi vide order dated 24-11-1989 classified the goods in question under Tariff Heading 85.17 of the Excise Tariff and no appeal was filed by the Revenue against this decision. Hence the issue of classification had already been decided in favour of the appellant.
9. Heard Shri A.K. Agarwal, SDR.
10. In this case the issue is regarding classification of coiled cords manufactured by the appellant. The respondent Revenue classified the goods under Tariff Heading 85.44 of the Central Excise Tariff after relying upon the Section Note 2 (a) of the Section XVI.
11. Tariff Heading 85.44 of the Central Excise Tariff provides as under:
“Insulated (including enamelled or anodised) wire, cable (including co-axial) and other insulated electric conductors, whether or not fitted with connections, optical fibre cables, made up of individually sheathed fibres, whether or not assembled with electric conductors or fitted with connections.”
12. The appellant contended that the coiled cords are to be classified under Tariff Heading 85.17 of the Central Excise Tariff. The Heading 85.17 provides as under:
Electric apparatus for line telephony or line telegraphy, including such apparatus carrier-current line system”.
13. The contention of the appellant is that the coiled cords are not sold in the running length, but are marketed in the form of sets having terminals at both ends. Hence are classifiable under Heading 85.17 as telephone parts /equipments.
14. We find that Section Note 2(b) of Section XVI is applicable in the present case. The Section Note 2 (b) provides as under :
Other parts, if suitable for use solely or principally with a particular kind of machine, or with a number of machines of the same heading (including a machine of Heading No. 84.79 or Heading 85.43) are to be classified with the machine of that kind. However, parts which are equally suitable for use principally with the goods of Heading Nos. 85.17 and 85.25 to 85.28 are to be classified in Heading No. 85.17.
15. We find that coiled cords are used between the receiver and the main telephone apparatus. From the process of manufacture as pleaded by the appellant and not rebutted by the Revenue, we find that the coiled cords are made out of tinsel conductor and several strands of thin ribbon type alloy are twisted together to form tinsel conductor and this was thereafter insulated.
16. Thereafter these are cut to required size and terminals are fitted at both ends. The coil cords are used solely and principally with as part of the telephone apparatus.
17. In view-of the Section Note 2(b) of Section XVI the product in question, which is sold in sets especially designed for use as part of telephone apparatus and which is solely or principally used as part of telephone apparatus (being apparatus falling under Tariff Heading 85.17) will be classifiable along with the telephone apparatus under Tariff Heading 85.17.
18. In view of above discussion the coiled cords fitted with terminals and used between the receiver and the telephone apparatus are classifiable along with the telephone apparatus as parts thereof under Tariff Heading 85.17 of the Central Excise Tariff. The impugned order are set aside and the appeals are allowed.