ORDER
T. Anjaneyulu, Member (J)
1. This appeal is filed against an Order dated 27.09.2000 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs (Appeals), Pune, by the assessee.
2. The appellants manufacture various types of Slats; for sugar factories as per specifications and designs given by the sugar factories. These slats are solely and principally used for replacement in place of the damaged ones in the conveyors of sugar canes and baggasse in the sugar factories. They are not suitable for use in any other machinery other than conveyors.
3. The appellants classified them under Chapter Heading 8428 as per their classification list dated 4.4.1994. This was approved by the proper officer.
4. The appellants received two Show Cause Notices from the Range Superintendent – one in January 1995 and another in April 1995, wherein the classification of goods was proposed under 8431 and demanded differential duty of Rs. 3,87,094/-. Both the original adjudicating authority and the appellate authority, on adjudication of the Show Cause Notices, confirmed the same.
5. The Asst. Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs had elaborate discussion on the matter of classification of various types of Slats i.e. Cane Carrier Slats, Cross Carrying Slats, RBC Slats and Inter Carrier Slats under Chapter Heading No. 8431 and confirmed two demands involving Central Excise duty of Rs. 3,07,094/- under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944.
6. The Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Pune, in his impugned order in para No. 4 has observed as follows:
I have carefully considered the case records, the submissions of the appellants, both written as well as oral. It is not in dispute that the subject slats are suitable for use solely with the conveyors used in the Sugar Industry and the subject slats, therefore, parts of the said conveyors falling under S.H.No. 8428. On the other hand the tariff heading 8431.00 specifically covers, inter alia, parts suitable for use solely or principally with the machinery of heading Nos. 8425.00 to 8430.00. It means the parts of machinery falling under S.H.No. 8428.00 would be classifiable under S.H.No. 8431.00. Thus the subject slats for conveyors used in sugar manufacturing industry gets specifically covered under tariff heading No. 8431.00, in terms of Section No. 2(a) of Section XVI of Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, as rightly held by the Adjudicating Authority. Thus the Section Note 2(b) of Section XVI is not relevant in this present case, for the same reasons, the case law in the case of Kirloskar Bros Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise reported in 95 (76) ELT 216 is also distinguishable and not applicable to the facts of the present case.
Thus, after thorough consideration of the matter, he had rejected the appeal.
7. We have heard at length and considered the submissions made by both sides. We do not find any merits in the present appeal filed by the assessee. The impugned order passed by the appellate authority does not call for any interference. In our considered view, it is proper and legal and not liable to be set aside. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal.
(Pronounced in Court on)