Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether tyre cord warp sheets dipped in Resorcinol Formal Dehyde Latex Solution were classifiable under Tariff Item 22(1)(b) of the Central Excise Tariff or under Entry 16A(2) of the erstwhile Central Excise tariff.
Analysis: The expression "man-made fabric" in Tariff Item 22 was held to cover only the specific categories described in that entry, namely fabrics impregnated, coated or laminated with preparations of cellulose derivatives or other artificial plastic materials and fabrics covered with textile flocks. The goods in question were not shown to answer that description. The Tribunal's approach, which relied substantially on the predominance test and on the earlier decision in Fenoplast, was held to be unsatisfactory because that decision had to be understood in its proper context and not as a complete answer to the classification dispute.
Conclusion: Tariff Item 22 was not held to be attracted on the material before the Court, and the Tribunal's order was set aside with the matter remitted for fresh consideration in accordance with law.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a tariff entry is limited to specifically described goods, classification cannot be sustained merely by invoking predominance of material without first establishing that the goods answer the statutory description of the entry.