9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 712X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the ingredients of glass fibre is predominant, i.e. in case of FRP vessel content of fibre glass is of 57% and in respect of the product composite vessel is 63% and in respect of the composite vessel, the fibre glass present is 38% but remaining 62% is of all other materials used. Therefore in all the three products, the predominent part of material used is fibre glass. According to the predominate principle, the products should be classified under chapter 70.14 - there is no dispute that the product in question in the present case is FRP glass fibre vessel wherein the predominent material is glass fibre. Therefore, it will be preferably classifiable under Chapter 70.14. Since the product in question is classifiable under Chapter 70, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ater Treatment Plants are excluded from Chapter No.84 and taking into consideration the manufacturing process, raw materials used and end use the products are correctly classifiable under CSH No.7014.00 as Article of Glass Fibres coated/covered with Plastics attracting duty @ 18% advalorem. A show-cause notice dated 04/05/98 was issued for recovery of differential duty of ₹ 6,48,292/- for the period from October 1997 to February 1998 and show-cause notice No.05/98-99 dated 05/10/98 for recovery of the differential duty of ₹ 40,33,775/- for the period from March 98 to September 98. Both the show-cause notices were decided by the adjudicating authority vide order No.78/98-Adj dated 23/03/99 and Order-in-original No.32/99-Adj dated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the matter with categorical findings that the classification should be decided according to the predominant of the material used and contained in the final products. As per the predominent of the material, the major items used in the manufacture of glass fibre vessel is the glass fibre. Therefore, the FRP glass fibre vessel should be classified under heading 7014 and not under chapter 84. He further submits that as per Chapter Note 1 (c), the goods falling under Chapter 7014 does not cover under Chapter 84. For this reason also under any circumstances, the glass fibre vessel will not classify under Chapter 84. In support, he placed reliance on the following judgements: a) Alnoori Tobacco Products - 2004 (170) ELT 135 (SC) b) S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e by both the sides. We find that the respondent is admittedly manufacturing glass fibre vessel wherein the ingredients of glass fibre is predominant, i.e. in case of FRP vessel content of fibre glass is of 57% and in respect of the product composite vessel is 63% and in respect of the composite vessel, the fibre glass present is 38% but remaining 62% is of all other materials used. Therefore in all the three products, the predominent part of material used is fibre glass. According to the predominate principle, the products should be classified under chapter 70.14. We find that the Ld. Commissioner takes support of the decision in the case of Kemrock Industries (supra) wherein it was held that the classification should be decided on the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the CETA, it would merit classification under that specific entry and not as part of machine, equipment, appliances of goods falling under Chapter 84 and/or 85. For this reason also when FRP glass fibre vessel as per the predominant principle classifiable under Chapter 70.14 even though it is used as part of the goods of Chapter 84 and/or 85, it would classify under Chapter 70.14 only and not Chapter heading 84.21. In this regard, we also refer to Chapter Note 1 (c) of Chapter 84 as under: Laboratory glassware (heading No.70.12); machinery, appliances or other articles for technical uses or parts thereof, of glass (heading No.70.14 or 70.15) . 7. From the above Chapter Note also it is clear that since the product in question i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assification should be based on the end use is not correct for the reason that there is no specific tariff entry for missile container in the Central Excise Tariff Act. The very same issue has been decided by the Larger Bench and upheld by the Hon ble Supreme court in case of Kemrock Industries Exports Ltd v. CCE [2007 (210) E.L.T. 497 (S.C.)]. In the said judgment the product in question was Fiber Glass Reinforced Plastic Articles, it was held that the Rule 3(b) of Rules for Interpretation of Tariff requires that composite goods, mixtures and goods put up in sets to be classified on the basis of materiel or component which gives the product its essential character. Following the said judgment, in the present case also the plastic being ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
