Common parlance governs tariff classification of building blocks, and the specific heading prevails over the residuary entry.

Classification of cement concrete building blocks and paver blocks depends on the common parlance meaning of "building blocks" under the Central Excise Tariff Act, not on IS specifications or end-use where the tariff entry does not make end-use determinative. Goods used for paving roads, footpaths, courtyards, parking areas and similar open spaces were treated as materials used for building structures and therefore fell under heading 6810 11 90. Because the goods were classifiable under the specific heading, the residuary heading 6810 99 90 could not be applied, and the related concessional duty benefit under Notification No. 10/2003 followed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the impugned cement concrete building blocks and paver blocks were classifiable under heading 6810 11 90 as building blocks or under the residuary heading 6810 99 90, and consequently whether the assessee was entitled to the concessional rate of duty under Notification No. 10/2003 dated 01.03.2003.

Analysis: The classification dispute was governed by the understanding of the expression "building blocks" under the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The Tribunal reiterated that IS specifications and end-use could not control tariff classification where the tariff entry did not itself make use the determinative criterion. The expression "building blocks" was not defined in the tariff, so the meaning had to be gathered from common parlance. On that approach, blocks used for paving roads, footpaths, courtyards, parking areas and similar open spaces were materials used for building structures and therefore fell within the specific heading 6810 11 90. Once the goods were correctly classified under the specific heading, the residuary entry could not be invoked, and the exemption linked to that classification followed.

Conclusion: The goods were held classifiable under heading 6810 11 90 and not under the residuary heading 6810 99 90, with the result that the assessee was entitled to the concessional duty benefit under Notification No. 10/2003 dated 01.03.2003.

Final Conclusion: The Revenue's challenge to the classification and exemption claim failed, and the order of the lower appellate authority was left undisturbed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a tariff entry is not governed by any statutory end-use criterion, classification must be determined on the common parlance understanding of the goods, and a specific entry prevails over a residuary entry.

---