9911796707
TMI Blog1988 (7) TMI 179X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f Item 23-A as glass and glassware . The Assistant Collector has held that glass tiles manufactured by the appellants are made of glass and powder not made from glass and as such it is a glassware. He has also held that unicolour tiles are not mosaic tiles as the mosaic tiles come into existence at site after coloured tiles are set in according to design. By the impugned order the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), New Delhi has upheld the classification decided by the Assistant Collector. The Collector (Appeals) has held that after Tariff Item 23-D has been made inapplicable to the glass tiles manufactured by the appellants, the same should automatically be taken into Tariff Item 23-A as glass and glassware. 2. We have heard Shri Da ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... attention to pages 14, 20, 21, 54 and 59 of the book titled 83- 84 Ceramic Tile from Japan , photo copies of which are placed at pages 31, 32, 39, 43 and 44 of the paper book filed by the appellants, to show that single colour tiles and individual units of tiles are also called mosaic tiles . Specifically drawing our attention to pages 54 and 59 of the aforesaid book, (Photo copies placed at pages 43 and 44 of the paper book), Shri Daya Sagar has stated that these pages of the authentic book clearly show that both unicolour and designed tiles are mosaic tiles . To become mosaic tile design is not necessary. He has further argued that in the Central Excise Tariff Guide compiled by the Directorate of Publications, Customs and Excise, an ex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .T. 572. In the said case, the appellants M/s. Empire Industries Limited manufactured glass tiles. The question arose whether those were classifiable as glass and glassware under Item 23-A of the Central Excise Tariff. Following the trade parlance that those glass tiles were known in the Trade as building materials and were not available with the dealers in glassware, the Tribunal held that glass tiles were not classifiable as glass or glassware under Item 23-A of the Tariff. Shri Daya Sagar has also relied on Bombay High Court decision reported in 1981 E.L.T. 147 (Born.) in the case of Techni-Glass Limited v. Union of India Others in which it was held: Since the product cell-O-Therm is made from broken glass which is a special type of g ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es in the common parlance. The learned S.D.R. for the Revenue has not produced any material to rebut the contention of the appellants. The learned S.D.R. has very fairly conceded that the appellants case is fully covered by the decision of this Tribunal reported in 1984 ECR 2437 and also by Bombay High Court decision reported in 1981 E.L.T. 147 (Bom.), which have been relied on by the learned Consultant for the appellants. 6. In the light of the above discussions, we do not find any justifiable reason for taking a view different from that already taken by the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Empire Industries Limited (Supra). We, accordingly, hold that the glass tiles manufactured by the appellants were not classifiable under Central Excise ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
