2001 (4) TMI 637 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Classification of 'Resin Bonded Glass Wool' under Heading 70.14 of the Central Excise Tariff Act.
2. Eligibility for the benefit of Notification No. 52/86 C.E., dated 10-2-1986 (Sl. No. 10 of the Table).

Detailed Analysis:

1. Classification of 'Resin Bonded Glass Wool':
The primary issue was whether the 'Resin Bonded Glass Wool' manufactured by M/s. F.G.P. Ltd. falls under Heading 70.14 of the Central Excise Tariff Act. The product was described as a wool felt composed of glass fibers impregnated with synthetic resin. The Assistant Collector, based on the Chief Chemist's test reports, determined that the product was impregnated with resin, thereby not qualifying for the exemption. The Collector (Appeals), however, concluded that the presence of impregnating material did not alter the fabric's character as it was bonded intermittently, leaving air pockets essential for its use as insulation material.

2. Eligibility for the Benefit of Notification No. 52/86 C.E.:
The Notification No. 52/86 C.E. provided a Nil rate of duty for "Glass fabrics other than fabrics impregnated, coated, covered or laminated with plastics or varnishes." The Revenue argued that the product was impregnated with synthetic resin, disqualifying it from the exemption. The Chief Chemist's report indicated the presence of phenol formaldehyde resin, suggesting impregnation. The respondents contended that the product was bonded, not impregnated, citing technical definitions and expert opinions from various research associations which supported their claim. The Collector (Appeals) and the Tribunal upheld this view, emphasizing that the bonding process did not fill the interstices completely, distinguishing it from impregnation.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal concluded that the 'Resin Bonded Glass Wool' is not impregnated, coated, covered, or laminated with plastics or varnishes, based on technical literature and expert opinions. Therefore, the product is eligible for the benefit of Notification No. 52/86 C.E. The appeal by the Revenue was rejected, affirming the Collector (Appeals) decision.