Textile classification turns on visible impregnation, and fabric with visible warp and weft falls outside Heading 59.06.

Cotton fabric dipped in a mixture and passed through rollers was held not to be classifiable as impregnated textile fabric under Heading 59.06 because the evidence showed the material was not wholly impregnated and the warp and weft remained visible to the naked eye. Chapter Note 5(a) excluded fabrics from Heading 59.06 where the impregnation, coating or covering could still be seen visually, so the goods fell outside that heading and were treated as cotton fabric under Heading 52.06. The assessee's classification was accepted on that basis.

---

---

Issues: Whether the manufactured fabric was classifiable under Heading 59.06 as impregnated textile fabric or under Heading 52.06 as cotton fabric, and whether Chapter Note 5(a) excluded the goods from Heading 59.06.

Analysis: The manufacturing process involved dipping cotton cloth in a mixture and passing it through rollers, after which the material was dried and cut. The classification turned on whether the resulting fabric was impregnated in the tariff sense. The Tribunal relied on the relevant tariff note and the chemical examination, including the retest report, which showed that the samples were not wholly impregnated and that the warp and weft were visible to the naked eye. On that basis, the case fell within Chapter Note 5(a), which excludes fabrics where the impregnation, coating or covering cannot be seen with the naked eye.

Conclusion: The fabric was not classifiable under Heading 59.06 and was outside that heading by virtue of Chapter Note 5(a); the assessee's classification was accepted.

---