Classification of Glass Chatons under Central Excise Tariff

Dear Mr. Chaturvedi,

Thank you for the posting.

However, I have been given to understand that glass chatons, and glass beads which do not have

a hole running across the bead are being classified by customs under 70181090.

Would you beaware if there has been any subsequent ruling by CEGAT on this issue?

Will appreciate your comments.

Dear Sir,

Classification of Glass Chatons by Customs under Chapter Sub-heading No.7018 10 90 is wrong. I hope that they (Custom authorities) are not well aware about Judgment of Hon’ble High Court of Bombay passed in the case of STARLITE  CORPORATION , BOMBAY Versus UNION OF INDIA reported as 1989 (39) E.L.T.538 (Bom.) wherein Hon’ble High Court has held that “ piercing of a Chaton is not essential for it to be called a bead. The petitioners articles are , therefore , Glass Beads”.

Being relied upon the Judgment of STARLITE  CORPORATION , BOMBAY Versus UNION OF INDIA reported as 1989 (39) E.L.T.538 (Bom.) in the case of RAJAN KUMAR AND BROS. (IMPEX) PVT. LTD. Versus COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS reported as 1992 (62) ELT 142 Tri. Delhi , Hon’ble Tribunal ( CEGAT) has held that Glass Chatons with two holes ( Sew-on-stones) are also Glass Beads.

As both the Judgments have been accepted by the department and no any appeal is filed to higher court  therefore , the issue with regard to classification of Glass Chatons as Glass Beads stand settled.

A larger bench of Hon,ble Supreme Court in the case of C.C.E. , NAVI MUMBAI Versus AMAR BITUMEN & ALLIED PRODUCTS PVT.LTD. reported as 2006 (202) E.L.T. 213 (S.C.) has held that “earlier order of tribunal on same issue not appealed against by revenue and has attained finality – Appeal against subsequent order on same question not maintainable”.

Remember: meaning of word “pierce” in Oxford Dictionary – “make hole in”