9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (2) TMI 201X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Trimurti Industries Ltd., sought classification of the subject goods under Sub-heading 6201.00 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, the Revenue classified the same under Sub-heading 4015.00. 3. The appellants have been engaged in the manufacture of the subject goods. In their classification lists effective from 25-4-1994, the same was declared as Articles of Apparel, not knitted or crocheted, all sorts, Rain Coats, Rain Suits, etc. under Sub-heading 6201.00 claiming "nil" rate of duty. The Revenue was of the prima facie view that the said goods would be classifiable under Sub-heading 4015.00 and accordingly a show cause notice dated 11-11-1994 was issued to the appellants. The appellants in their reply contended that the subject good ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r Section XI of the CETA but under Chapter 40. As such, the order passed by the lower Adjudicating Authority classifying the said products under Chapter 40 (SH. No. 4015.00) is proper and justified." 5. In their Memorandum of Cross-Objection, the Respondent submitted as under :- "The ground stated in para 1 under "Grounds of Appeal" does not and cannot lead to the conclusion that the respondent was manufacturing "Articles of Apparel, not knitted or crocheted all sorts - Rain Coats, Rain Suits" out of 'Rubberised Fabrics' instead of 'Rubberised Textile Fabrics' and in which rubber was predominated in terms of weight without having any evidence on record about predominance and holding that the impugned product attracts classification unde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Textile Articles) clearly, envisages that the woven, knitted or crocheted fabrics, felt or non-woven, impregnated, coated, covered or laminated with rubber and articles thereof are not covered under Section XI and as such the subject goods are correctly classifiable under Sub-heading 4015.00 as held by the adjudicating authority. He, therefore, makes a prayer for setting aside the impugned order passed by Commissioner (Appeals). 7. Shri B.K. Munshi, ld. Consultant appearing for the Respondent Company, while reiterating the contentions in the Memorandum of Cross-Objections, points out that the Adjudication Order No. 12/Ch. 40/Collr. CE/Cal. II/91, dated 6-8-1991 in the case of M/s. Bengal Waterproof Ltd., is on the ground of limitation wit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
