1987 (12) TMI 56 - AT - Central Excise

Tribunal Confirms 'Slagwool' as Man-Made Fibre Under Excise Law, Citing Historical Context and Technical Support.

PIBCO Versus COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CALCUTTA

PIBCO Versus COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CALCUTTA - 1988 (35) E.L.T. 130 (Tribunal) Issues Involved:1. Classification of 'slagwool' under Central Excise Tariff Item (TI) 18.2. Interpretation of 'Man-Made Fibre' and whether 'slagwool' falls under this category.3. Applicability of various notifications and definitions in determining the classification.4. Historical context and changes in tariff entries and their impact on classification.Detailed Analysis:Issue 1: Classification of 'slagwool' under Central Excise Tariff Item (TI) 18The appellants manufacture 'slagwool & Resin Bonded Slagwool' and were directed to declare stocks and follow Central Excise formalities in May 1973. They later contested this classification, arguing that their products, being of inorganic nature, should not fall under TI-18. The Assistant Collector rejected their refund claim, and subsequent appeals upheld this decision.Issue 2: Interpretation of 'Man-Made Fibre' and whether 'slagwool' falls under this categoryThe core issue was whether 'slagwool' qualifies as a 'Man-Made Fibre' under TI-18. The appellants argued that 'slagwool,' being a mineral fibre, does not fit within the definition of 'synthetic fibres' or 'man-made fibres' as these terms are generally associated with the textile industry. They cited various technical books, dictionaries, and standards to support their claim.The Tribunal, however, concluded that 'slagwool' is a 'synthetic fibre' as it is artificially produced from slag and fluxing agents. The explanation to TI-18, which includes 'Man-Made Fibres,' was deemed to have widened the scope of the entry. The Tribunal emphasized that the term 'Man-Made Fibre' is of the widest import and is not restricted to textile items alone. The classification was supported by various definitions and examples from technical literature, which indicated that 'Man-Made Fibre' could include inorganic fibres like 'slagwool.'Issue 3: Applicability of various notifications and definitions in determining the classificationThe Tribunal examined several notifications, including Notification 48/73 and Notification 115/73, which specifically mentioned 'slagwool' as exempted goods under TI-18. These notifications were used to argue that 'slagwool' was understood to fall under TI-18 in trade and common parlance. The principle of contemporaneous expositio was applied, indicating that the government's intention was to include 'slagwool' under TI-18 until a separate entry for mineral fibres was created in 1976 under TI-22F.Issue 4: Historical context and changes in tariff entries and their impact on classificationThe Tribunal considered the historical context, noting that prior to 1976, mineral fibres like 'slagwool' were included under TI-18. The creation of TI-22F in 1976, which specifically excluded mineral fibres from TI-18, was seen as a consequential amendment rather than a reclassification. The Tribunal concluded that the inclusive definition in TI-18, which did not restrict its application to textile fibres, supported the classification of 'slagwool' as a 'Man-Made Fibre.'ConclusionThe Tribunal upheld the classification of 'slagwool' under TI-18 as a 'Man-Made Fibre.' The decision was based on the broad interpretation of the term 'Man-Made Fibre,' historical context, and the inclusive nature of the tariff entry. Notifications and technical definitions supported this classification, indicating that 'slagwool' was understood to fall under TI-18 until the creation of a separate entry for mineral fibres in 1976.