2008 (8) TMI 79 - AT - Central Excise

Whether PVC (MF) Laminated Sheet is classifiable under Heading 6807.90 or 3918.10 - contents of the dolomite is more than 50% in the product - appellants claim that the plastic has been used as binder, is acceptable Explanation of Heading 68.10 indicates that articles such as slabs, tiles etc. obtained from agglomerating pieces of natural stone with cement or other pipes, e.g. plastics would be classifiable in that heading classification u/sh 68907.90 is sustained

Summary

Issues:
Classification of PVC (MF) Laminated Sheet under Central Excise Tariff Heading 6807.90 or 3918.10.

Analysis:
The appeal involved the classification of PVC (MF) Laminated Sheet under Central Excise Tariff Heading 6807.90 or 3918.10. The original adjudicating authority had classified the product under 6807.90, while the Commissioner (Appeals) classified it under 3918.10, leading the appellants to approach the Tribunal once again. The appellant argued that the product's classification should be based on the raw materials, emphasizing the percentage of PVC and other fillers. They cited precedents and judgments to support their contention, highlighting the importance of the primary constituent in determining classification. Additionally, they pointed out that their product was similar to one classified under Chapter 68 by a competitor, emphasizing the absence of evidence showing PVC as the essential characteristic. The Department, on the other hand, supported the classification under Chapter 39, citing expert opinions and the product's essential characteristic deriving from plastic. They relied on the rule of interpretation of the Tariff, emphasizing the constituent providing the essential characteristic for classification.

The Tribunal considered the arguments presented by both sides and noted the classification of a similar product by another company under Chapter 68. It was observed that while the appellants claimed plastic was used as a binder, the Department contested this assertion. Referring to the Explanatory Notes of Heading 68.10, it was highlighted that plastics mentioned in the notes were used as binders for articles like slabs and tiles. The Tribunal found that apart from the chemical examiner's opinion, no concrete evidence was presented regarding the exact nature of plastic utilization in the case. The original adjudicating authority extensively discussed the classification issue post-remand, considering various legal precedents, while the Commissioner (Appeals) relied on the chemical examiner's opinion and the manufacturing process. The Department failed to provide evidence demonstrating the product was marketed as plastic tiles. Consequently, the appeal was allowed with consequential relief, favoring the appellants' classification under Central Excise Tariff Heading 6807.90.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the key arguments, legal principles, and evidentiary considerations that influenced the Tribunal's decision on the classification of the PVC (MF) Laminated Sheet.