9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Classification of Cellulose Sheet under sub-heading 4811.90 or 4823.30 of Central Excise Tariff Act. Analysis: The appeal involved a dispute over the classification of a Cellulose Sheet of specific dimensions under the Central Excise Tariff Act. The appellants, M/s. Silk Route, contended that the product should be classified under sub-heading 4823.30, which covers "Cellulose Insole Board or Sheet," to avail of concessional duty rates. They argued that the size restrictions in other headings did not apply, citing relevant notifications and previous tribunal decisions. On the other hand, the Department argued that the product fell under sub-heading 4811.90 based on HSN Explanatory Notes, which are considered a guide for classification. The Department emphasized that the tariff descriptions in headings 48.11 and 48.23 were identical, with no ambiguity. The Tribunal considered the submissions from both sides and referred to the HSN Explanatory Notes for clarity. The Notes under Heading 48.23 specified size limitations for the classification of paper and paperboard products. Since the Cellulose Sheet in question measured 100 cm x 150 cm, it did not meet the criteria under Heading 48.23. Additionally, the Asstt. Commissioner had determined that the imported Cellulose Sheet did not qualify as an Insole for footwear under 48.23, a finding unchallenged by the appellants. The Tribunal also referenced a Supreme Court decision emphasizing the importance of aligning tariff classification with internationally accepted nomenclature like the HSN. Ultimately, the Tribunal upheld the classification of the Cellulose Sheet under sub-heading 4811.90, in line with the HSN Explanatory Notes and the Supreme Court's guidance. The appeal filed by the appellants was rejected based on the established classification principles and lack of grounds for interference with the lower authority's decision.
|
