Plastic footwear classification turns on whole composition, not predominance by weight or value under the VAT entry.

Footwear with an upper of plastic-coated fabric was held not to qualify as "plastic footwear" under Entry C-74 of the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002, because the entry had to be read on its own language and not by importing HSN or Central Excise tariff notes. The Court rejected a predominance-by-weight-or-value test, treating it as an impermissible rewrite of the entry. Applying the view that articles of plastic are those made wholly of plastic, the product's textile upper and absence of complete plastic composition kept it outside the entry. The Tribunal's view was set aside and the Revenue's classification was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether footwear having an upper part of plastic coated fabric and not made wholly of plastic can be classified as "plastic footwear" under Entry C-74 of the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002, and whether the predominance of plastic by weight or value can control the classification.

Analysis: Entry C-74 had to be construed according to its own language. The Court held that the explanatory notes to the Central Excise Tariff and the HSN could not be imported into the Maharashtra Value Added Tax Act, 2002, as no legislative incorporation of that scheme had been made. The product in question was admittedly not wholly made of plastic and the upper portion consisted of textile material with a plastic coating. The Court held that adding a predominance test would amount to rewriting the entry. Relying on the principle that articles made of plastic are those made wholly of plastic, and following the view taken in earlier authorities on similar classification issues, the Court rejected the contention that a product made predominantly of plastic would automatically fall within the entry.

Conclusion: The footwear did not fall within Entry C-74 as "plastic footwear". The Tribunal's view was set aside and the Revenue's classification was upheld.

---