COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE Vs. VOLTAS LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondents herein who are manufacturers of various refrigerating and air -conditioning machinery and appliances, were served with a show cause notice dated 5.9.1997 alleging: -

(2.) WE have heard both sides.

(3.) AS per Note 2(a) to Section XVI, parts which are goods included in any of the headings of Chapter 84 or 85 other than certain excluded hearings, are in all cases to be classified in their respective headings. Therefore, if the parts are goods specified in themselves and included in any of the headings of Chapter 84 or 85, other than the excluded headings, then they will merit classification in that heading, for e.g. if a "bearing housing" is a part of refrigerating gas compressor, it will merit classification under Heading 84.83 and not 8414.92 as part of the compressor for the reason that "bearing housing" is specifically enumerated in Chapter Heading 84.83. This is further supported by Rule 3(a) of the Rules for interpretation of the tariff which states that the heading which provides a more specific description shall be preferred to a heading providing a more general description. Further, the HSN General Explanatory Notes with reference to parts of Section XVI state that in general, parts which are suitable for use solely or principally with a machine or apparatus or with a group of machines or apparatus falling in the same heading are classified in the same heading as those machines or apparatus subject to the exclusion mentioned in part I dealing with general contents of the section of the said Explanatory Notes. It is further stated that this Rule does not apply to parts which in themselves constitute an article covered by heading of Section XVI other than heading 84.85 and 85.48 and these are in all cases classified in their own appropriate heading. We also find that our view, is buttressed by the orders of the Tribunal in Chamundi Machine Tools Ltd. v. CCE , Instrumentation Engineers Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE Madras , Textool Co. Ltd. v. CCE, Coimbatore and Kirloskar Pneumatic Co. Ltd. v. CCE, Bombay .