Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether Crayplas Compound was excisable goods; (ii) under which CETA sub-heading the product was classifiable.
Issue (i): Whether Crayplas Compound was excisable goods.
Analysis: The product had already been held in the assessee's own case to be a marketable commodity emerging in the course of manufacture of plastic crayons. That finding was treated as governing the dispute, and the challenge to excisability was not accepted.
Conclusion: The product was held to be excisable goods.
Issue (ii): Under which CETA sub-heading the product was classifiable.
Analysis: The earlier decision on the same product had settled classification by holding that Crayplas shapeless plastic crayons had the essential characteristics of finished crayons and were more akin to crayons than to pigments and preparations based thereon. On that basis, classification under Heading 96.09 was accepted in preference to Heading 32.04.
Conclusion: The goods were held classifiable under CETA sub-heading 9609.00 and not under CETA sub-heading 3204.10.
Final Conclusion: The impugned classification under Heading 32.04 was set aside and the product was brought under Heading 96.09, resulting in no duty liability for the period in dispute.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a manufactured product is marketable and possesses the essential characteristics of the finished article, classification follows the article to which it is more closely akin rather than the broader competing heading.