2018 (7) TMI 1770 - AT - Central Excise

Classification of goods - tents made of cotton - classified under Chapter sub-heading No. 63062100 of CETA, 1985 or not? - benefit of N/N. 29/04-CE dated 09.07.2004 - Held that - The issue is squarely covered by the decision in the case of COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, LUCKNOW. VERSUS M/S A.R. POLYMERS PVT. LTD., FATEHPUR 2017 (3) TMI 415 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD , where it was held that the description of the goods covered by the said SCN matches with the entry in the said notification stating to be cotton, not containing any other textile material , goods were rightfully attracting 4% duty as provided by the said exemption under N/N. 29/04-CE dated 09.07.2004 - appeal allowed- decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
Request for adjournment, Classification of goods under Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, Benefit of Notification No.29/2004-CE, Demand of Central Excise Duty, Show Cause Notice, Tribunal's precedent decision.

Request for adjournment: The appellant requested an adjournment which was rejected, and the appeal proceeded for a decision.

Classification of goods under Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985: The appellant, a manufacturer of tents made of cotton, availed Cenvat Credit and classified the goods under Tariff Item No.63062100. The revenue contended that materials other than cotton used in manufacturing, like Aluminum Joints and pipes, attracted an 8% duty ad valorem.

Benefit of Notification No.29/2004-CE: The appellant availed the benefit of Notification No.29/2004-CE dated 09.07.2004, which provided a 4% ad valorem duty for goods made of cotton not containing any other textile materials, but the revenue disputed the eligibility of the goods for this benefit.

Demand of Central Excise Duty: A Show Cause Notice was issued demanding Central Excise Duty of &8377; 50,86,530 for the period 2006-07 to 2010-11, based on the contention that materials like Aluminum used in the manufacturing process were not covered under the 4% duty benefit.

Show Cause Notice: The appellant contested the Show Cause Notice, and the issue was decided through an Order-in-Original where the demand was confirmed, and a penalty was imposed.

Tribunal's precedent decision: The Tribunal referred to a previous decision where it was held that goods made of cotton not containing any other textile materials were rightfully attracting a 4% duty as per the exemption under Notification No. 29/2004-CE dated 09-07-2004. The Tribunal found that the facts of the present case were covered by this precedent decision and set aside the Order-in-Original, allowing the appeal and granting consequential relief to the appellant.