2001 (2) TMI 203

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed without payment of duty, holding that the items fall for classification under Chapter Heading 55.06 (sic) of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. 2. Learned Counsel, Shri A.V. Phadnis, submits that the process adopted by the appellants is only common proofing of canvas cloth. There is no impregnation covering or coating so as to bring the cloth within the purview of Chapter sub-heading 59.06, that the layer formation is not visible to the naked eye and therefore classification under sub-heading 59.06 is ruled out, and he submits that the Tribunal had decided the identical issue in the case of CCE C, Aurangabad v. Ratan Tarpaulin Water Proof Industries - 2000 (126) E.L.T. 782 (Tribunal) = 2000 (89) ECR 503 wherein the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s dipping of canvas cloth in melted paraffin wax at 120°C contained with filters. The whole process up to this stage is manual. Then the waxed canvas cloth is squeezed by using electric motor, which is the sole of power operated stage. After squeezing if to be cleared as tarpaulin, it is stitched, fixed with eye lets, etc. In rest other cases it is claimed to be sold as water-proof cloth." The process carried out by Ratan Tarpaulin Water Proof Industries is reproduced below :- "They purchased grey cloth in running length from the market and subjected it to water-proofing; that the process of manufacture was that water-proofing solution prepared out of yellow or white ochre, paraffin wax, rosin, lubricating oil, pigments, aluminium stear .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... urface of the material are covered with a film or a skin. The bench has also perused the Encyclopaedia of Chemical Technology of water-proofing which shows that water-proofing results from coating of a fabric and filling the pores with film forming material etc. We note that the CBE C in the circular dated 18-10-1996 also speaks about a visible layer different from uneven residues and patches. The bench has held that formation of layer must be visible for the purpose of classification under chapter 59. Therefore, in the present case the Collector is not correct when he says in the impugned order that visibility of formation of layer is not required for considering the classification under Chapter Heading 59.06. In view of the process of m .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X