1983 (9) TMI 279 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues: Classification of fabric under Central Excise Tariff Schedule - Interpretation of Items 19 and 22

Issue 1: Interpretation of Item 19 - Cotton Fabrics

The appeal concerns the classification of a fabric, Sort No. 89225, containing polyester, viscose, and cotton. The dispute revolves around whether the fabric falls under Item 19 (Cotton Fabrics) or Item 22 (Man-made Fabrics) of the Central Excise Tariff Schedule. The appellants argue that Item 19 covers fabrics where cotton predominates in weight, while the authorities contend that the fabric falls under Item 19 due to the predominance of cotton. The interpretation of the expression "predominates in weight" in Item 19 is crucial to determining the classification. The Tribunal analyzes different views on this interpretation, ultimately holding that the fiber should comprise over 50% of the fabric's weight to be considered predominant, aligning with the appellants' argument.

Issue 2: Interpretation of Item 22 - Man-made Fabrics

The second main issue pertains to the interpretation of Item 22 regarding man-made fabrics. The debate focuses on whether a distinction should be made between cellulosic and non-cellulosic fibers in determining if a fabric qualifies as a man-made fabric. The Department argues for a separate consideration of these fibers, while the appellants advocate for a combined approach. The Tribunal deliberates on the logical interpretation, emphasizing that for the fabric to be deemed a man-made fabric under Item 22, the content of both cellulosic and non-cellulosic man-made fibers should be collectively assessed. This decision is pivotal in classifying the fabric under the correct tariff item.

Conclusion:

In its final ruling, the Tribunal determines that the fabric in question, with 65% man-made fibers and 35% cotton, is appropriately classified under Item 22 of the Central Excise Tariff. By resolving the issues surrounding the interpretation of Items 19 and 22, the Tribunal allows the appeal in favor of the appellants, providing them with consequential relief. The judgment clarifies the criteria for classifying fabrics under the Central Excise Tariff Schedule, emphasizing the significance of fiber composition and predominant weight in determining the appropriate tariff item.