BCL FORGINGS LIMITED Vs. CCE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD both sides. The appellants filed this appeal against the impugned order whereby the goods manufactured by the appellants were held to be classifiable under heading 87.08 and 84.03 as parts of the Automobiles.

(2.) THE contention of appellant is that the goods in question are forgings and are classifiable under Chapter 7326.19 and entitled for the benefit of Notification No. 223/88 dated 23.6.1988.

(3.) THE contention of appellant is that the goods in question are only forgings and forged products of steel and they are not identifiable as parts of automobiles. The appellants are only undertaking the process of forging and only removes the excess material by way of trimming. The contention is that these forgings are cleared to various customers who undertake the process of turning, milling, drilling, grooving on the goods cleared by the appellants. After doing these processes, the identifiable parts of automobiles come into existence. As the forgings cleared by the appellants are not used as such and the customers undertake further processes, therefore, the same cannot be held to be parts of Automobile. The contention is that revenue is classifying goods in question as parts of motor vehicles on the ground that these forgings have attained the shape and outline of finished article classifiable under Chapter heading 84 and 87 of the Central Excise Tariff. The appellant relied on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CCE v. Jaypee Forges . The appellants also relied upon the following decisions of the Tribunal: Neco Castings Ltd v. CCE Nagpur 2002 (150) ELT 117 SC Shivaji Works Ltd v. CCE Aurangabad Sharda forgings & Stampaings (P) Ltd v. CCE Ghaziabad .