9911796707
TMI Blog1987 (10) TMI 160X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ponge obtained in specific shapes and sizes have been described as bus seats and scooter seats and classified under TI 16A(1). Subsequently, the respondents filed a classification 6.2/81/82, dated 25.1.1982 wherein they stated to have classified the latex foam sponge described as bus seats and scooter seats as motor vehicle parts non-specified falling under T.I. 68 of the C.E.T. The Assistant Collector rejected the assessees claim and classified the goods under T.I. 16A(1). 3. The respondents preferred an appeal and the Appellate Collector under the impugned order held that the articles should be classified under T.I. 68. He was of the view that the respondents manufacture such cushions to a shape and quality depending upon the ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... shapes and sizes are classifiable as motor vehicle parts under T.I. 34A prior to 1.3.1979 and under T.I. 68 as non-specified motor vehicle parts after 1.3.1979. The process of manufacture has been set out by the respondents as follows : Latex cushions are made by frothing 60% centrifuged liquid latex by mechanical whipping, after adding necessary frothing chemicals. This whipping is carried out in metal bowls and using wires whisks. Different chemicals required for vulcanisation and improved gaeing qualities are also added before whipping. When the frothed latex reached the desired volume, a delayed action gelling agent is added and thoroughly mixed. At this stage when the froth is still liquid, the same is transferred to aluminium mould ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ut earlier, it is clear that the product is nothing but latex foam sponge. The mere fact that the frothed sponge is transferred to aluminium moulds of particular shapes will not take away the products out of the ambit of the Tariff Item 16A(1). 7. It was vehemently urged that the ratio of the Supreme Court decision in the case of M/s. Atul Glass [1986 (8) E.C.R. 513 = 1986 (25) E.L.T. 473 (S.C.)] would apply to the case. The question for consideration in that appeal was in regard to the items mirrors, wind screens, rear screens and door screens. The computing entries were glass-ware under T.I. 23A(4) and Item 68 in the case of glass mirrors and 23A(4), 34A and 68 in the case of glass panes for motor vehicles. In paragraph 8, it is observe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pecifically mentioned in Notification No. 101/71-C.E., dated 29.5.1971 as amended. The Finance Bill of 1979 restricted the scope of the entry 34A to 15 items. Parts and accessories of motor vehicles and tractors falling under T.I. 34A were exempted from the whole of duty of excise leviable thereon if they were intended to be used in the manufacture of assembled motor vehicle parts as original equipments. Hence it was held that since the wind screen is part and accessory of motor vehicles, it would attract duty under T.I. 68 as the item has not been mentioned under T.I. 34A as amended. The ratio of that ruling will not apply to the present facts. 11. The Appellate Collector has relied on an earlier decision of the Central Government in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to add a few words of my own. 14. This Tribunal s decision in the case of C.C.E., Madras v. M.M. Rubber Co. Ltd. Madras, Wt (15) E.L.T. 198 is squarely on the issue posed in the present appeal. It was held therein that latex sponge cushions seats (naked, without covers) were classifiable under Item No. 16A(1), CET even in the period prior to 1.3.1979 (when the entry was amended to include articles of latex foam sponge), in preference to Item No. 34A, CET, as unspecified parts or accessories of motor vehicles. There is no doubt that the subject goods are made of latex foam sponge and that they are made not out of larger pieces of sponge but are moulded into the shape of bus seats etc. at the stage of manufacture of the sponge itself. Give ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mere plain glass sheet nor, as the Court observed, was it any longer known as glassware. It is in this background that the Court held that mirrors would be classifiable under the CET, not as glassware under Item No. 23A(4) but as mirrors which, being unspecified in the Schedule, fell under Item No. 68. In the present case, though the latex foam sponge has undoubtedly acquired the shape of bus seats etc., it has not, unlike in the case of glass mirror, undergone such a complete or considerable transformation that the moulded product no longer is identifiable as latex foam sponge. It continues to be sponge moulded into a particular desired shape. And, there was no specific item, more specific than latex foam sponge , to cover the moulded go ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
