9911796707
TMI Blog1986 (3) TMI 178X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iscose 52% Polyester fibre15% Acrylic fibre 33% The appellants claimed the classification of these yarns under Item 18III(i) of the Central Excise Tariff Schedule (CET). However, the Assistant Collector, Central Excise rejected the claim and classified the goods under Item 18 III(ii), CET on the ground that the non-cellulosic fibre content of the yarn, exceeded 1/6th by weight of the fibre content. The appellants claim was based on the contention that acrylic fibre was, for tariff purposes, always classed along with wool (reference explanation III to item No. 18), that in the market too, acrylic fibre was classed along with wool, that acrylic fibre was not known in the market as non-cellulosic fibre, that while interpreting excise notification No. 52/72, the Government of India and the Calcutta High Court had held that acrylic fibre was distinct from other non-cellulosic fibre. These contentions were rejected by the Assistant Collector. In appeal, also, they were not accepted. The Appellate Collector, in his impugned order dated 2-1-1981 relied on certain technical authorities to the effect that acrylic fibre was a non-cellulosic fibre. Since th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ther than noa-cellulosic fibre [see Explanation III (c) and (f) to item No. 18 ; 18B ; 18E, CET], then, it could not be treated as a non-cellulosic fibre for certain purposes lest contradictions result. In other words, acrylic fibre could not be treated at times as acrylic fibre and at other times as non-cellulosic fibre. Continuing, Shri Kohli referred to the decision of the Calcutta High Court in the Bengal National Textile Ltd. v. C.T.A. Pillai Others. - 1979 ELT-(J 664) holding that acrylic fibre could not be considered as non-cellulosic. The Bombay High Court in its judgment dated 5-12-1980 Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. v. C.T.A. Pillai Others.- followed the aforesaid decision and held a blend containing 85% acrylic and 15% nylon as not non-cellulosic. These two decisions were binding on all quasi-judicial authorities - reliance on the Delhi High Court judgment in Civil Writ No. 115-D/63-J.K. Synthetics Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, Delhi-1985 (21) ELT. 410 (Del.) Though the two decisions of the Calcutta and Bombay High Courts were rendered in the context of the tariff, as it stood prior to 18-6 1977, they were equally applicable to the tariff as it stood from 18-6-197 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dispute before us, the constituent fibres are equal in weight. As such Explanation III has no application to the present blends. 12. It needs to be noted that wherever the tariff intends to exclude acrylic fibre from being considered as a non-cellulosic fibre, it says so specifically in so many words. Item 18E-"Non-cellulosic spun yarn", for e.g., is defined as spun (discontinuous) yarn in which man-made fibres of non-cellulosic origin, other than acrylic fibre, predominate in weight and............ . What is clear is that the framers of the tariff entry were aware that acrylic fibre is a non-[cellulosic fibre but, for the purpose of Item 18E, they deliberately excluded l acrylic fibre from consideration in the computation of the predominance or otherwise of non-cellulosic fibres. 13. In contrast, we find that in sub-items (i) and (ii) of Item 18 III (with which we are concerned), the relevant words used are - ........ one sixth by weight of non-cellulosic fibre calculated........... The words of exclusion other than acrylic fibre in Item 18E and even in the Explanation III(f) to Item 18 [admittedly not applicable here-but the exclusion of acrylic fibre , from (f) is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rts of the notification read as follows :- 2 Yarn spun (a) wholly out of synthetic staple fibre of non-cellulosic origin other than acrylic fibre; or (b) partly out of the staple fibre aforesaid and partly any other fibre or fibres (including acrylic fibre) provided that the natural fibre content if any, of the yarn does not exceed 10% of its weight. If the non-cellulosic fibres content of it is (i) 50% or more Rs. 15.00 per kg. (ii) xx xx xx xx (iii) xx xx xx xx (iv) 10 per cent or lessRs. 7.50 per kg." The Appellate Collector held- I am inclined to agree with the appellant and hold that the acrylic fibre is to be taken as included in any other fibre or fibres as distinct from staple fibre according to the provisions of the notification. So acrylic fibre is not to be taken as non-cellulosic staple fibre in determining rate of duty of yarn under the above notification. It may be noted that the notification, on the face of it, said that ......fibre of non-cellulosic origin other than acrylic fibre" (emphasis supplied) in Sl. No. 2(a). Prima facie, therefore, when Sl. No. 2(b) spoke of- partly out of the staple fibre aforesaid a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
