9911796707
TMI Blog1983 (9) TMI 279X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ter, 32% viscose and 35% cotton. Polyester is a non-cellulosic man-made fibre, while viscose is a cellulosic man-made fibre. The appellants have contended that the fabric falls under Item 22 of the Central Excise Tariff Schedule, whereas the authorities below have taken the view that it falls under Item No. 19 of the said Tariff Schedule. 2. Relevant extracts from the aforesaid tariff items are given below :- Item No. 19. Cotton Fabrics "Cotton Fabrics" means all varieties of fabrics manufactured either wholly or partly from cotton and includes dhoties, sarees, chadders, bed-sheets, bed-spreads, counterpanes, table-cloths, embroidery in the piece, in strips or in motifs and fabrics impregnated, coated or laminated with preparations ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the piece, in strips or in motifs and fabrics impregnated, coated or laminated with preparations of cellulose derivatives or of other artificial plastic materials, in each of which man-made (i) cellulosic fibre or yarn, or (ii) non-cellulosic fibre or yarn, predominates in weight : Provided that in the case of embroidery in the piece, in strips or in motifs and fabrics impregnated, coated or laminated with preparations of cellulose derivatives or of other artificial plastic materials, such predominance shall be in relation to the base fabrics which are embroidered or impregnated, coated or laminated, as the case may be. * * &e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sought to be applied. She finally submitted that in the two views where possible, the view which was in favour to the assessee should be adopted. 5. For the Department, Shri Tayal stated that there was no dispute on the facts. On the merits, he submitted that Item 19 had to be read with Explanation II after that item. This explanation made a distinction between man-made fibre of cellulosic origin and man-made fibre of non-cellulosic origin. Item 22 also made a distinction between cellulosic fibre or yarn and non-cellulosic fibre or yarn. Explanation II under Item 22 made applicable Explanation II under Item 19. In the light of the wording of these two items, the content of cellulosic fibre and of non-cellulosic fibre in the fabric sho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Of the two possible interpretations, it is the first which commends itself to us for the reasons which follow. 9. The expression has to be seen in its present context, which is to decide whether a fabric can be called a cotton fabric, a man-made fabric, and so on. The normal and logical approach in deciding such a question would be to consider whether a particular fibre constitutes the bulk of the fabric, and not whether it happens to be the single largest constituent, irrespective of its absolute quantum. Thus, if a fabric is composed of 5 or 6 different fibres, the largest of which constitutes about 20% by weight, it would not be logical to call the fabric as one made from that fibre, merely because it is the largest single consti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng wholly of that one textile material which predominates in weight over any other single textile material". 12. Explanation II under Item 19 and Explanation III under Item 22 are not directly applicable to the present case, since all the 3 fibres in the fabric (Sort No. 89225) are unequal in weight. 13. For the reasons given above, we consider that the expression "pre-dominates in weight", without further qualification as in Items 26A etc., should be taken to mean that the fibre should comprise over 50% of the weight of the fabric. 14. The next question would be whether for the purpose of applying Item 22, a distinction should be made between cellulosic and non-cellulosic fibre. At first sight it might appear that this is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ead in a disjunctive sense, or as separating two alternatives, but, depending on the context, it may have to be read as meaning "and". [A detailed discussion of this question is contained in the Tribunal's order No. B-326/83, dated 29-4-1983, in the case of Copper Rollers Private Ltd., Bombay v. Collector of Central Excise, Bombay, reported in 1983 E.L.T. 981 (CEGAT)]. The present is clearly a case where the context requires that the word "or" between "cellulosic.....' and "non-cellulosic......" should be read as indicating that each variety could be wholly or partly a substitute for the other. 17. Shri Tayal had pointed out that Explanation II to Item 19, corresponding to Explanation III to Item 22, also draws a distinction betw ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
