1987 (4) TMI 341 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Classification of imported Acrylic Plastic Scrap under Central Excise Tariff Item 15A(1) or Item 68.
2. Applicability of Explanation III to Tariff Item 15A.
3. Use of CCCN (Customs Cooperation Council Nomenclature) notes in interpreting Central Excise Tariff.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Classification of Imported Acrylic Plastic Scrap:
The primary issue was whether the imported Acrylic Plastic Scrap should be classified under Central Excise Tariff (CET) Item 15A(1) or Item 68. The importers argued that the scrap did not fall under sub-item (1) of Item 15A-CET, which pertains to artificial or synthetic resins and plastic materials. They contended that the scrap resulted from plates and sheets, which do not fall under sub-item (1) but rather under sub-item (2). The Tribunal noted that plates and sheets do not fall under sub-item (1) of Item 15A, and thus, the scrap derived from these should not be classified under sub-item (1).

2. Applicability of Explanation III to Tariff Item 15A:
Explanation III to Tariff Item 15A was a critical point of contention. The explanation specifies that sub-item (1) applies to materials in specific forms, including waste and scrap. The Tribunal emphasized the significance of the word "only" in Explanation III, which restricts the scope of sub-item (1) rather than enlarging it. The Tribunal rejected the argument that waste and scrap should be classified under sub-item (1) simply because they are mentioned in Explanation III. The Tribunal referred to previous judgments, including Paresh Products and Pearl Plastics Manufacturing Co., which supported the view that waste and scrap do not fall under sub-item (1) unless they possess plasticity and can be directly moulded.

3. Use of CCCN Notes:
The Tribunal addressed the argument regarding the use of CCCN notes by the Collector of Customs (Appeals). Although the Tribunal did not delve deeply into the validity of using CCCN notes, it ultimately held that the imported goods did not fall under sub-item (1) of Item 15A-CET but under Item 68, rendering the CCCN notes argument moot.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal concluded that the imported Acrylic Plastic Scrap is not classified under sub-item (1) of Item 15A-CET but under Item 68. Consequently, the appeals filed by the revenue were dismissed, and the appeals filed by the importers were allowed. The Tribunal's decision was based on the interpretation of Explanation III, the nature of the imported goods, and the relevant case law.