2006 (8) TMI 222 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
Classification of printed wrappers for shaving blades under sub-heading 4823.90 or 4901.90; Applicability of Chapter Note XI of Chapter 48 in classification; Remand of the matter to the original adjudicating authority.

Classification of printed wrappers: The Tribunal referred the issue of classification of printed wrappers for shaving blades to the Larger Bench due to divergent views in precedent decisions. The appellant's case involved conflicting decisions classifying the goods under sub-heading 4823.90 and 4901.90. The Tribunal considered various decisions, including one where it was held that printed gay wrappers are classifiable under sub-heading 4901.90. Following this precedent, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and classified the gay wrappers under sub-heading 4901.90.

Applicability of Chapter Note XI: The Tribunal noted Chapter Note XI of Chapter 48, stating that goods printed with motifs not merely incidental to the primary use fall under Chapter 49. However, the issue of classification depended on whether the design or words printed were incidental to the primary use of goods. The Tribunal observed that the dispute in the present case related only to the sub-heading of heading 48.23, not Chapter 49. As Chapter 49 was introduced for the first time during the appeal, the matter should have been remanded to the lower authorities to determine the applicability of various Tribunal decisions to the facts of the case.

Remand of the matter: The Tribunal found that the dispute on classification hinged on the status of the paper at the time of clearance. As the lower authorities had not provided views on whether the product fell under Chapter 49, the Tribunal decided to remand the matter back to the original adjudicating authority for further assessment. The Tribunal emphasized the need for a clear understanding of the product's status and the views of the adjudicating and appellate authorities before making a final classification decision. Consequently, the Tribunal returned the file to the referral Bench for appropriate orders.