9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
1983 (8) TMI 262 - AT - Central Excise
Issues: Classification of Slagwool under Central Excise Tariff Item 18, Validity of duty demand, Show cause notice requirement, Exemption of pre-duty quantity
In this case, the main issue was the classification of Slagwool under Item 18 of the Central Excise Tariff, specifically whether it could be considered a synthetic fiber. The appellants argued that Slagwool was a natural mineral fiber, not a synthetic fiber, citing various sources such as the BTN, Customs Tariff, and technical publications. They contended that since Slagwool was not produced by chemical synthesis, it should not be classified as a synthetic fiber. However, the Department's representative argued that the inclusive definition in the Tariff entry deemed man-made fibers as synthetic, regardless of chemical origin, and that Slagwool being a man-made mineral fiber fell under this category. The Tribunal agreed, stating that man-made fibers are those made by man and not naturally occurring, and since Slagwool is manufactured in factories, it qualifies as a man-made fiber, thus falling under the category of synthetic fibers. Another issue raised was the validity of the duty demand and the requirement of a show cause notice. The appellants claimed that no show cause notice was issued to them, but the Department's representative argued that the appellants were duly heard before the demand was confirmed, thus complying with principles of natural justice. The Tribunal agreed with the Department's representative, stating that there was no violation of natural justice in this regard. Furthermore, the appellants raised a claim regarding the exemption of a pre-duty quantity of Slagwool. However, the Tribunal referred to established authorities and ruled that according to Rule 9A of the Central Excise Rules, the rate of duty applicable at the time of goods removal applies, not the rate at the time of manufacture. Therefore, the Tribunal rejected the appeal based on this claim and upheld the duty demand on the Slagwool cleared by the appellants.
|
