Tariff classification of lightning arresters turns on finished product identity, not a porcelain component, and excise levy fails.

Lightning arresters sold as finished electrical goods could not be classified as porcelain ware merely because a porcelain shell formed one component of the product. The tariff entry applied to porcelain ware as such, and the department had not established that the assessee manufactured porcelain ware as an independent marketable commodity. The presence of porcelain in the finished article did not make the whole product dutiable under the porcelain ware heading. Relying on earlier tariff construction involving similar use of porcelain components in another electrical article, the court held that excise duty on the porcelain content was unsustainable and set aside the levy in favour of the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether lightning arresters manufactured with porcelain shells as one component could be treated as porcelain ware under Tariff Item 23-B of the First Schedule to the Central Excise Act and subjected to excise duty on the porcelain content.

Analysis: The manufactured article as sold was lightning arresters and not porcelain ware as such. The porcelain shell was only a component used in the manufacture of the finished product, and the department had not shown that the petitioner was manufacturing porcelain ware as an independent marketable commodity. A finished product does not become dutiable under the porcelain ware entry merely because it contains a porcelain component. The earlier decision concerning similar use of porcelain components in another electrical article supported the same construction of the tariff entry.

Conclusion: The levy of excise duty on the porcelain content of the lightning arresters was invalid and was set aside in favour of the assessee.

---