1992 (1) TMI 102

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... olly was read in the entry to render it workable. Thus glass fabric manufactured out of mineral fibre is exigible to duty under Item No. 4 but arc chamber housing manufactured from glass fabric cannot be placed at par with glass fabric and cannot be considered as `other manufacture of glass fibre or yarn. This appeal succeeds and is allowed. The orders of Tribunal, Collector and Assistant Collector are set aside. The arc chamber housing manufactured out of glass fabric are held to be exigible to duty during the relevant period under Item No. 68.
S.R. Pandian and R.M. Sahai, JJ. S. Ganesh and Amitabh Marwah, for the appellant. G.V. Subba Rao, for the respondents. [Judgment per : R.M. Sahai, J.]. - The question of law that arises for co .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... yarn was predominant in the weight. In appeal it was held that the words "manufactured therefrom" in Tariff Item No. 22F(4) would include not only first manufacture of mineral fibre and yarn but also subsequent manufacture wherein mineral fibre or yarn was used. The order was affirmed by the Tribunal on construction of the expression "manufacture therefrom" which were capable of a simple and straightaway meaning that the goods should be manufactured from mineral fibre and yarn. The CEGAT held that glass fabric was no doubt an intermediate stage between glass arc housing and glass fibre or yarn yet the goods were exigible to duty under 22F(4), as the arc housing chamber did not cease to be manufacture of glass fibre/yarn merely because the f .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... is plain and simple. It intends to clarify the expression `manufacture therefrom' by expanding it to include in its ambit even those manufactures in which fibre or yarn predominated in weight. But it did not go beyond it and purported to include manufactures out of manufacture of a commodity in which mineral fibre or yarn predominated. The entry was added in 1980. That gave an occasion for the learned counsel for Union of India to urge that it was intended to evade payment of duty by widening and expanding the ambit of entry. In our opinion the item cannot be construed in the manner suggested. The entry was widened but to the extent indicated above. Any other construction would result in altering the principal clause. That would be contrar .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X