1979 (1) TMI 109 - CGOVT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Assessment of 'ded suti' cotton fabrics under Central Excise Tariff - Classification under Item 19.I (2) vs. 19.I (1) - Correct amount of duty calculation.

Analysis:
1. The dispute in this case revolves around the classification of 'ded suti' cotton fabrics manufactured by the petitioners under the Central Excise Tariff. The petitioners argued that it should be classified under Item 19.I (2), while the authorities classified it under Item 19.I (1) as a fabric of duck variety. The petitioners emphasized the differences between 'ded suti' and duck fabrics, citing construction particulars and market usage as distinguishing factors.

2. During the personal hearing, the counsel presented samples of both fabric varieties and highlighted the differences. They argued that 'ded suti' fabric is coarse, made from short staple cotton, primarily used for summer tent covers and shoe linings, while duck fabric is finer and used for tropical suitings. Affidavits from industry experts supported the contention that 'ded suti' and duck fabrics are distinct and known by different names in the market.

3. However, the Government, after careful consideration, found it challenging to accept the petitioners' contentions. They noted that the weight of the fabrics is a crucial factor in classification, with duck fabrics weighing more than 8.00 OZ per kg yarn. The fabrics described as 'ded suti' by the petitioners matched the construction particulars of duck fabrics, weighing between 9.82 OZ to 10.00 OZ per sq. yarn, with double ends in warp and single yarn in weft.

4. Additionally, the Government referred to a judgment by the Allahabad High Court in a similar case, where it was observed that fabrics known as "Do Suti" and "Ded Suti" were not distinguishable from duck fabrics based on technical definitions in the textile industry. Considering the construction particulars and the High Court's ruling, the Government concluded that the fabrics in question should be classified as duck fabrics under entry 19-I (1) of the Central Excise Tariff.

5. Regarding the calculation of duty, the Government directed the Assistant Collector to determine the correct assessable value and the exact duty payable by the petitioners. While the minor contentions about duty calculation were addressed, the revision application was ultimately rejected, affirming the classification of the fabrics as duck fabrics based on construction particulars and market usage.