9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
- Determination of appropriate excise duty item for P.V.C. Conveyor Belting manufactured by respondents. - Interpretation of Item 22 and residuary entry 68 of the Central Excise Tariff. - Analysis of the manufacturing process and composition of the P.V.C. Conveyor Belting. Analysis: The appeals under Section 35L(b) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 question whether P.V.C. Conveyor Belting falls under Item 22(3) or the residuary entry 68 for excise duty. The Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal accepted the manufacturers' position that the appropriate item is 68, contrary to the Revenue's claim that Item 22 applies. The Tribunal's finding was based on the composition and manufacturing process of the belting. The Chemical Examiner's Certificate described the belting as composed of synthetic resin of P.V.C. type and textile fabric. The weaving of fabric and application of P.V.C. Compound were done simultaneously, indicating the conversion from yarn to fabric during manufacturing. The departmental representative relied on this process before the Tribunal, which ultimately accepted it as a factual finding uncontested by the appellants. Item 22 of the Central Excise Tariff pertains to man-made fabrics predominated by man-made fibers or yarn. However, due to the higher percentage of P.V.C. Compound in the belting, it was deemed inappropriate to classify it as man-made fabric under Item 22. Consequently, the Tribunal correctly concluded that the belting did not fall under Item 22 but was governed by the residuary entry 68. Therefore, all appeals were dismissed, and each respondent was awarded costs. In summary, the judgment resolved the issue by determining that the P.V.C. Conveyor Belting manufactured by the respondents should be classified under the residuary entry 68 of the Central Excise Tariff due to the manufacturing process and composition, rather than under Item 22.
|
