Skip to content


Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Ramsons Udyog (P) Ltd. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtCustoms Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided On
Reported in(2000)(67)ECC110
AppellantCommissioner of C. Ex.
RespondentRamsons Udyog (P) Ltd.
Excerpt:
.....decided by the collector (appeals) or under headings 73.24, 76.15 and 76.11 of the schedule to the central excise tariff act, 1985.2. when the matter was called no one was present on behalf of the respondents m/s. ramsons udyog (p) ltd. who have requested under their letter dated 6-9-1999 to decide the matter on the basis of written arguments. they submitted that the issue regarding the classification of the impugned items has been settled by the appellate tribunal in the case of commissioner of central excise, bangalore v. sri ram metal works, reported in 1998 (99) e.l.t. 616 (tribunal), wherein it was held that railway coach work has to be treated in the broad sense which goes to make the coach functionally complete. in the case of railways, it goes without saying that the provisions.....
Judgment:
1. The issue involved in this appeal filed by the Revenue is whether Aluminium Water Tanks, Stainless Steel Wash Basins and Lavatory Pans are classifiable under Heading 8607.00 of CETA as decided by the Collector (Appeals) or under Headings 73.24, 76.15 and 76.11 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985.

2. When the matter was called no one was present on behalf of the respondents M/s. Ramsons Udyog (P) Ltd. who have requested under their letter dated 6-9-1999 to decide the matter on the basis of written arguments. They submitted that the issue regarding the classification of the impugned items has been settled by the Appellate Tribunal in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore v. Sri Ram Metal Works, reported in 1998 (99) E.L.T. 616 (Tribunal), wherein it was held that Railway Coach work has to be treated in the broad sense which goes to make the coach functionally complete. In the case of railways, it goes without saying that the provisions of water in the coach is a necessity and the coach can be taken to be complete with the fitment of the water tank. On the same rationale, sanitarywares are also designed for fitment into the coach and they would be classifiable under Heading 86.07. Following the ratio of this decision, we find no infirmity in the impugned order and the appeal filed by the Revenue is rejected.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //