1986 (12) TMI 268

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... at it was assessable under Central Excise Tariff Item 18-E @ Rs. 24/- per kg. 2. When the party went up in appeal, the Appellate Collector upheld the classification under Tariff Item 18-E on the ground that Tariff Item 18-III pertains to yarn in which man-made fibre of cellulosic origin predominates in weight. In this case the percentage of man-made cellulosic fibre being only 47%, it was held that the appellants plea that the goods are correctly classifiable under Item 18-III of Central Excise Tariff had to be rejected and the goods had to be considered non-cellulosic yarn attracting classification under Central Excise Tariff Item 18-E. However, the Appellate Collector partly allowed the appeal inasmuch as he held that the demand for dut .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... uld now like to submit that the correct classification for the product, in view of the foregoing arguments, is under Item 68 of the Central Excise Tariff. 5. Shri P.K. Ajwani, SDR appearing for the department reiterates the view expressed by lower authorities. He submits that the request for classification under Item 68 is not tenable as no submission in this regard was made before the lower authorities. 6. We have carefully considered the facts of the case, the Orders of the lower authorities and the submissions made before us. We observe that appellants have for the first time taken the plea before us that the impugned goods are correctly classifiable under Item 68 of the Central Excise Tariff. This view has, therefore, remained un-ex .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nch in the case of Gaekwar Mills Ltd. Bombay (supra) with which we wholly agree, we don t think that it can be said that in the impugned goods, man made fibre of non-cellulosic origin predominates. Therefore, the yarn in question is also not classifiable under Item 18-E of the Central Excise Tariff. 9. In the appellate orders, it has already been decided that the demand for duty is to be limited to the normal period. This view is upheld. 10. In the light of the foregoing discussions the correct classification of the impugned yarn is under Item 68 of the Central Excise Tariff. Ordered accordingly. However, recovery will be restricted to the demand as modified per Appellate Collector s order. Appeal is allowed in these terms. - - Tax .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X