Wonder marble slabs classified under Chapter 25 not Chapter 68

The Tribunal held that the wonder marble slabs should be classified under Chapter 25 instead of Chapter 68 as claimed by the Commissioner. The additional processes applied to the slabs were deemed to be for repairing defects and ensuring protection during handling and transportation, rather than altering the nature of the product. As the repaired slabs continued to be known, used, and characterized the same as prime quality slabs, the classification under Chapter 25 was upheld. The Tribunal waived the pre-deposit of duty and interest, acknowledging the strong case presented by the applicants and expedited the hearing due to the recurring classification issue.

---

---

Issues involved: Classification of wonder marble slabs u/s Chapter 25 or Chapter 68.

Summary:
The stay petition was filed against an Order-in-Original directing payment of differential duty on wonder marble slabs. The main issue was the classification of these slabs under Chapter 25 as claimed by the applicants or under Chapter 68 as held by the Commissioner.

The applicants argued that the processes of netting, crack filling, and resin treatment were done to repair defective slabs, maintaining that the nature of the finished product remained unchanged. They contended that both types of rough marble slabs were commercially known as rough marble slabs and used for similar purposes.

The Commissioner classified the wonder marble slabs under chapter 25 for prime quality slabs and under chapter 68 for defective slabs that underwent additional processes for repair. The Tribunal noted that the additional processes were for mending defects and providing protection during handling and transportation, not for changing the nature of the product.

It was held that since the repaired slabs remained the same in name, character, and use as the prime goods, there was no valid ground to change the classification to chapter 68. The Tribunal waived the pre-deposit of duty and interest, considering a strong case made by the applicants and directed an early hearing due to the recurring nature of the classification dispute.

---