2004 (3) TMI 495 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues: Classification of P.U. Foam mattresses under Central Excise Tariff - Heading 39.21 or Heading 94.04

In this judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, New Delhi, the issue at hand is the classification of P.U. Foam mattresses manufactured by a company under the Central Excise Tariff. The main question is whether these mattresses should be classified under Heading 39.21 as contended by the respondents or under Heading 94.04 as argued by the Revenue.

The Appellant, represented by Ms. C. Baranwal, SDR, argued that the goods in question should be classified under Heading 94.04, as they are being sold and understood as mattresses in common commercial terms. It was emphasized that Heading 94.04 specifically covers mattresses, which is the primary use of the product. The Appellant also relied on a previous Tribunal decision to support their classification stance.

On the other side, the Respondent, represented by Shri Naveen Mullick, Advocate, asserted that the product has not acquired the characteristics of mattresses as indicated in the show cause notice. Reference was made to a Trade Notice suggesting that polyurethane sheets obtained from P.U. Foam blocks for mattresses fall under Heading 39.21. The Respondent highlighted a Tribunal decision stating that P.U. Foam sheets need further working to be considered mattresses.

Upon considering both arguments, the Tribunal analyzed Note 10 to Chapter 39 of the Central Excise Tariff, which clarifies the scope of "plates, sheets, film, foil, and strip." It was noted that the Revenue failed to provide evidence that the P.U. Foam sheets in question had undergone further working to be classified as mattresses. Referring to a previous case, the Tribunal explained that mattresses require additional work like reinforcing edges to transform into the final product. The Tribunal also cited a Customs Cooperation Council clarification supporting the classification of P.U. Foam sheets under Chapter 39. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the classification under Heading 39.21, rejecting the appeal by the Revenue.