Tarpaulin classification under Heading 52.06 turns on visible impregnation, while power use defeats the manufacture exemption claim.

Tarpaulin cloth is classifiable under Heading 52.06, not Heading 59.06, where the impregnation or coating is not visibly formed on the fabric and the warp and weft structure remains visible to the naked eye. Applying the visible-layer test and the supporting circulars, the text treats waterproofed fabric of this kind as falling outside Heading 59.06. On the exemption issue, manufacture without the aid of power was not established because the representative's statement and the officers' visit indicated use of power, and the assessee failed to discharge the burden of proof for the claimed exemption.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether tarpaulin cloth was classifiable under Heading 52.06 or Heading 59.06. (ii) Whether the tarpaulins were manufactured without the aid of power so as to qualify for the relevant exemption.

Issue (i): Whether tarpaulin cloth was classifiable under Heading 52.06 or Heading 59.06.

Analysis: Heading 59.06 applies only to textile fabrics otherwise impregnated, coated or covered where the impregnation, coating or covering can be seen with the naked eye. The test report showed that the interstices between the yarns were not completely filled, light passed through the fabric, and the warp and weft yarns were visible. The Board's circulars also emphasised that a visible uniform layer is required and that water-proofed fabrics of this kind are covered under Chapter 52. The earlier Tribunal view on similar facts was also followed.

Conclusion: The tarpaulin cloth was held classifiable under Heading 52.06, in favour of the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether the tarpaulins were manufactured without the aid of power so as to qualify for the relevant exemption.

Analysis: The statement of the assessee's representative and the officers' visit indicated use of power in manufacture, and the assessee did not establish regular manufacture without power. The assessee therefore did not discharge the burden of proving entitlement to the exemption based on manufacture without aid of power.

Conclusion: The finding was against the assessee on the use of power and the duty exemption based on that ground was not .

Final Conclusion: The classification issue was decided in favour of the assessee, but the exemption question based on absence of power was not established by the assessee, and the matter was sent back for re-determination of SSI eligibility, duty and penalty.

Ratio Decidendi: Tarpaulin or waterproofed fabric is classifiable under Heading 52.06, and not Heading 59.06, where the impregnation or coating is not visibly formed on the fabric and the yarn structure remains visible to the naked eye.

---