Tariff classification of fused quartz: duty demand failed because the excise entry did not extend glass to fused quartz.

Articles of fused quartz were not classifiable as glass or glassware under Item 23A of the Central Excise Tariff because that entry contained no extension clause or deeming fiction equating fused quartz with glass. Notes in Chapter 70 of the Customs Tariff Act and the CCCN could not be imported into the central excise entry, and there was no evidence of commercial understanding treating fused quartz articles as glassware. The demand for central excise duty was therefore unsustainable and was set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether articles of fused quartz were classifiable as glass or glassware under Item 23A of the Central Excise Tariff so as to sustain the demand of central excise duty.

Analysis: The tariff entry for glass and glassware did not contain any extension clause or deeming fiction equating fused quartz with glass. Although Chapter 70 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 and the CCCN contained notes extending the expression "glass" to fused quartz, those notes could not be imported into Item 23A of the Central Excise Tariff. In the absence of such a statutory extension and of evidence that fused quartz articles were regarded as glassware in commercial parlance, the classification adopted by the department could not be sustained.

Conclusion: The demand for central excise duty on articles of fused quartz under Item 23A was not sustainable and was set aside.

Ratio Decidendi: A tariff entry cannot be enlarged by reference to another tariff regime or chapter note unless the charging entry itself contains a corresponding extension or deeming provision, and classification must be supported by statutory language or accepted commercial understanding.

---