1975 (2) TMI 28 - HC - Central Excise

Electric insulators - H.R.C. Cartridge Fuselinks - Porcelain - Connotation of - Classification of goods

Summary

Issues: Scope of Entry 23 B in Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944; Classification of High Rupturing Capacity Cartridge Fuselinks for excise duty under the Entry.

In this case, the petitioner, an electrical equipment manufacturer, questioned the classification of High Rupturing Capacity Cartridge Fuselinks for excise duty under Entry 23 B of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. Initially, the Revenue concluded that the fuselinks did not fall under the Entry based on a Chemical Examiner's report. However, a revised opinion later led to the petitioner being notified of excise duty liability. The petitioner argued that the fuselinks, containing 28% Steatite and 20% Zircon Silicate, did not meet the typical composition of porcelain, hence should not be classified as such. The court examined various definitions of porcelain and concluded that variations in composition do not necessarily disqualify a product as porcelain. The court emphasized that the character of an article as porcelain is not solely determined by specific proportions or qualities. The petitioner contended that since the Entry mentions "chinaware and porcelainware, all sorts," the fuselinks could not be considered porcelainware. The court referred to a Supreme Court decision emphasizing that excisable goods need not be marketable individually but can still be subject to excise duty if covered by the Act. The court analyzed the enumeration of articles in Entry 23-B and found that the fuselinks did not align with the items listed, such as tableware and glazed tiles. Despite the broad language of the Entry, the court held that the fuselinks did not qualify as porcelainware under Entry 23-B. Therefore, the court ruled in favor of the petitioner, stating that the High Rupturing Capacity Cartridge Fuselinks were not liable for excise duty under the Entry.