9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (1) TMI 436X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er has held that the goods would not be entitled to the exemption, demanded duty consequently payable on the yarn cleared in terms of the exemption and imposed penalties on the manufacturer and on Pankaj Rungta, its director. Hence these appeals. 2. The entries in the notifications are identically worded. We will consider, for the discussion, entry 119 of the table to Notification 5/98. This exempts from duty nylon monofilament yarn falling in Chapter Heading 5404.10 of denierage 210, 330, 420, 630, 840, 1050 or 1680, with tolerance of 4 per cent. Notice issued to the appellant proposed to deny the exemption on two grounds, firstly that the goods were not nylon monofilament yarn, and secondly that they were not of the denierage specif ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es and in fact is used as fishing lines and bristles. I, therefore, hold that the product manufactured by M/s. JMPL and cleared in the hand form/cut rolls for fishing lines and bristles is Nylon Monofilament, not "yarn" and hence cannot be considered as Nylon Monofilament yarn, which merits classification under CSH No. 5404.10. Further, even when Nylon Monofilament of continuous length is cut into short lengths as bristles, the product still remains classified under the CSH 5404.10 although having different characteristic than Yarn. Therefore, the argument for alternative classification advanced by M/s. JMPL is not tenable in view of the exclusion provided by the chapter note discussed above." 5. The words of Heading 54.10 or any of i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rd ''monofilament yarn" or some such description so as to distinguish them from monofilament. As the entry stands however sub-heading 10 is only for monofilament. 8. It is a well settled principle of judicial interpretation that nothing must be construed in such a manner as to render the words of any legislation meaningless or redundant. We have seen that the sub-heading 10 covers only monofilament. The exemption is for nylon monofilament yarn. The only possible way of reconciling these two is therefore to say that monofilament figuring in Heading 5404.10 also includes if there is such any separate from monofilament, monofilament yarn. 9. It is no doubt true, as the Commissioner has said, that yarn generally refers to a textile ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rpose but may not always be used only for this. In fact the Panaji Bench of the Bombay High Court in Sainet Private Ltd. and Another v. Union of India and Another - 1984 (18) E.L.T. 141 that fishing net is a fabric because to the appellant with regard to yarn clear for making fishing nets. The decision of the Tribunal in ZEB Monoplast (P) Ltd. v. CCE - 2001 (131) E.L.T. 624 held that monofilament was classifiable in Heading 39.26 as an article of plastic and not in Heading 54.06. That decision will have no relevance to the issue before us. We are not concerned here with the classification of the product in Heading 39.26. The Commissioner having accepted this classification in Heading 5404.10 but only with the applicability of the notificati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
