1990 (2) TMI 161

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... covered or laminated with plastics or varnish falling under Heading 7014, covered by Serial No. 10 of the above notification, while the Department classifies them as all goods other than the goods impregnated, coated, covered or laminated with plastics or varnish , (falling under Heading 7014) covered by Serial No. 11 and attracting duty at the rate of 20% ad valorem. 2. The appellants are the manufacturers of the following products :- (1) Twiga Insul Resin Bonded Glasswool Mat (Glass Fabrics) (Various dimensions). (2) Twiga Insul Resin Bonded Glasswool Mat (Glass fabrics) (Aluminium Facing) (Various dimensions). (3) Twiga Insul White Glasswool Mat. (4) Twiga Insul White Glasswool Mat (Aluminium Facing). (5) Twiga Insul Resi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of the Glass Mat/Felt with binding/varnish. It is therefore, not correct that impregnation, coating or lamination of the Glass Wool Mat/Felts is done at any stage. 4. That according to the statute the impregnation should be of fabrics not of the Fibres only and impregnation envisages there should be no spaces/holes in the body of the impregnated fabrics. But it is not so in respect of their products which is light, . and compressible and full of air. It is wholly erroneous to allege that the Glass Wool mats/felts are impregnated with Plastics/varnish. 5. That in regard to allegation that the product does not have flexibility, it is submitted that it is light in weight, can be wrapped and easily manipulated like an ordinary blanket. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... an Iyer for the appellants Shri L.C. Chakravarty for the respondents. 6. The grievance of the appellants is that the impugned order is a non-speaking order, showing total lack of application of mind. 7. We have heard both sides and considered their submissions and gone through the impugned order. We find that the lower appellate authority has mainly relied upon the Chemical Examiner s report to arrive at her finding that the goods in question are not glass fabrics. She has not considered the detailed technical literature placed before her by the appellants, nor has she dealt with the affidavits of the trade as to the commercial identity of the products. She has failed to take into account the manufacturing, process. She has not referr .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X