Water-proof canvas classification turns on impregnation versus coating, with treated fabric placed under Chapter 52 instead of Chapter 59.

Water-proof canvas treated by dipping in melted paraffin wax and squeezing was held not to fall under Chapter Heading 59.06 because the process amounted to water-proofing rather than impregnation. The Tribunal drew the distinction that impregnation requires the interstices of the fabric to be completely filled, while Chapter 59 contemplates a visible layer or skin on the fabric. Relying on the classification of identical goods in an earlier comparable matter, it concluded that the treated canvas did not satisfy the description for Chapter 59 and instead fell under Chapter Heading 52.06/52.07.

---

---

Issues: Whether water-proof canvas manufactured by the appellants was classifiable under Chapter Heading 59.06 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 or under Chapter Heading 52.06/52.07 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985.

Analysis: The process of manufacture showed that the canvas was subjected to water-proofing by dipping in melted paraffin wax and squeezing, resulting in a treated fabric similar to the process earlier examined in the comparable case. The relevant distinction was between impregnation, where the interstices of the fabric are completely filled, and water-proofing, where the fabric is covered by a film or skin. The Tribunal relied on the earlier classification of identical goods and accepted that, for Chapter 59, the formation of the layer must be visible. On that basis, the goods did not answer the description of Chapter Heading 59.06.

Conclusion: The goods were not classifiable under Chapter Heading 59.06 and were classifiable under Chapter Heading 52.06/52.07.

---