2004 (5) TMI 365 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Classification of "dyed D/C book binding cloth" under Heading 52.06 or under 5901.10 of Central Excise Tariff Act.

Analysis:
1. The appeal was filed against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) by the Revenue regarding the classification of "dyed D/C book binding cloth" under Heading 52.06 or 5901.10. The Assistant Commissioner initially classified it under 5901.10 due to being coated with gum and other substances, used for book binding. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld this classification, leading to a series of challenges and reclassifications.

2. The Tribunal, in a prior order, remanded the case back to the adjudicating authority for retesting the fabric to determine its classification based on specific characteristics like stiffness and imperviousness to water. This led to further testing and classification under Heading 52.06 by the Assistant Commissioner, which was challenged by the department.

3. The Assistant Commissioner's decision was upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals), who referenced previous Tribunal decisions and the test report from CRCL to support the classification under 52.06. The Commissioner also highlighted the relevance of Notification 253/82-C.E. and previous Tribunal decisions in similar cases.

4. The Revenue appealed against the Commissioner's order, arguing that the CEGAT's remand order did not specify classification under 52.06 based solely on stiffness and imperviousness to water. They cited previous Tribunal decisions classifying book binding cloth under 5901.10 to support their argument.

5. The Tribunal analyzed the case, emphasizing that the remand order did not limit classification based only on stiffness and water imperviousness. They noted that the specific description of "dyed D/C binding cloth" indicated classification under Heading 59.01, which covers fabrics coated with gum or amylaceous substances, as confirmed by the CRCL test report.

6. The Tribunal distinguished previous Tribunal decisions cited by both parties, stating that they were not directly applicable to the classification of book binding cloth in this case. They concluded that the impugned goods fell under 5901.10 based on the specific description and coating criteria, overturning the Commissioner's decision and allowing the Revenue's appeal.