9911796707
TMI Blog1997 (1) TMI 259X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on thereof under Chapter Heading 5408.00. Before the introduction of the new Tariff, the product was classifiable under T.I. No. 22 (1) (a) of the erstwhile Central Excise Tariff. This classification was approved by the Asstt. Collector. However, the Collector, Central Excise, Madurai issued a show cause notice on 27-3-1987 stating that the unprocessed cotton/nylon carcass manufactured by the appellants was a special type of fabric manufactured out of thick yarn consisting of nylon filament yarn, nylon spun yarn and cotton yarn twisted and doubled simultaneously in a special type of twisting-cum-doubling machine, that the fabric is woven in a special type of carded machine consisting of 3 sets of warp yarn, weft yarn and that the fabrics so woven were thick and were exclusively used for special industrial purposes that is for manufacture of fenaplast and therefore, the said carcass was classifiable under Chapter Heading 5909.00 "as all other textile products and articles of a kind suitable for industrial use". Accordingly, appellants were asked to explain as to why the said product should not be classified under Chapter Heading 5909.00 and why the differential duty should not be de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der Chapter Heading 5408 both on facts and in law. The ld. Counsel submitted that Chapter Heading 5909.00 reads: "All other textile products and articles of a kind suitable for industrial use etc."; that the Chapter Note 6 specified the goods that would be attracted under Chapter Heading 5909.00; that none of the descriptions of articles given under Chapter Note 6 applies to the carcass produced by the appellants; that the mere woven fabrics unprocessed cannot be considered as an article of a kind suitable for industrial use; that it is not the case of the deptt. that the said fabric is straightway used as fabrics for any industrial use; that Chapter Heading 5909.00 has not stopped with a mere description of the goods, but also furnished examples of goods that would be attracted by this Heading; that none of the examples mentioned therein would be applicable to the goods under dispute and therefore, the reclassification of the goods under Chapter Heading 5909 was not warranted. 5. The ld. Counsel also argued that the product was an in process material used as a raw material for manufacture of Fenaplast and therefore, it was not goods as it was not marketable nor could be used ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... well as on limitation, the case is in their favour. 7. Shri G.D. Sharma, the ld. DR appearing for the respondent Commissioner submitted that Chapter Heading 5408 covers "All types of fabrics of man-made filament yarn not subjected to any process". He submitted that to qualify for assessment under this Heading, the product should be acceptable in the trade as consumer textile fabrics; that the product described as carcass manufactured by the unit is of no use in the trade as consumer textile fabrics; that the terms `carcass' is not a technical term; that the product is exclusively used in the manufacture of fenaplast which is a variety of flame proof colliery belting; that the fabric is used only as an industrial fabric and not as a consumer textile fabric; that the fabric is commercially not known in the common parlance as consumer textile fabric; that the item which equally attracts two different Chapter headings for classification, the classification under the most specific heading has to be preferred. Taking into account its essential characteristic, the ld. DR submitted that after reading the description of the goods under the two different Chapter Headings, the classific ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cation of the product in dispute. Two entries are 5408 as claimed by the appellants and 5909 as held by the department. The two entries have been set out in the foregoing paragraphs. For determining the correct classification of the product, let us fist examine what an industrial fabric is. According to ISI specification No. 2364-1979, `Industrial Fabrics' has been defined as "Fabrics whose interstices in the yarn have been filled with chemical compound so as to cover the entire surface. Commonly used for leather bags, garments, insulation tapes etc." Further Industrial Fabrics means fabrics made from man-made or natural yarn which are commonly used on machine such as belting duck, filter cloth, sizing flannel etc." 12. The Dictionary of Textile Terms defines `Industrial Fabrics' "As differentiated from consumer textiles products which are commonly used in the various manufacturing industries for factory purposes. Prominent in this group are such textile products as machine belting straps, pads and similar types of fabrics or yarns both man-made and natural." The new Encyclopedia of Textiles at page 495 defines `Industrial Fabrics' as a large and important group of textiles w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s', the words `five years' were substituted. Now in case there has been suppression or misstatement, the demand of duty can be raised under the provisions of Section 11A. This demand cannot be confined only to a particular aspect but can be extended to all aspects including the approved C/List or price list if the proviso/provisions are attracted. 15. Now coming to the third aspect, we find the allegation is that the appellants suppressed the detailed description of the goods. The appellants in this case submitted that they have been manufacturing fenaplast for a long time; that they have been submitting C/List from time to time. The deptt. alleged that the appellants had given detailed description of the goods in the price list submitted before 1-3-1986 but held back a part of the description of the goods with classified list submitted on 1-3-1986 to avail a lower rate of duty. On a scrutiny of the Classification prior to 1-3-1986 and on or after 1-3-1986, we find that the description as given earlier was partly given on or after 1-3-1986. The appellants contended that they had curtailed the description to suit the requirement of the tariff. We find that the appellants have ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
