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 the product, consisting of plastic and non-plastic components, was classifiable under Tariff Item 15A(2) of the Central Excise Tariff or under Tariff Item 68 of the Central Excise Tariff.
Analysis: Tariff Item 15A(2) was construed as covering plastic material in different shapes and forms, and not articles made from plastic material mixed with other materials. The controlling principle applied was that articles made of plastic must be articles made wholly of commodity commercially known as plastic. Since the product contained only 28% plastic and 72% non-plastic material, it did not satisfy that test.
Conclusion: The product was not classifiable under Tariff Item 15A(2) and was correctly classified under Tariff Item 68; the finding is against the assessee.
Final Conclusion: The appeal failed on the classification issue and the refund claim could not succeed.
Ratio Decidendi: For classification under Tariff Item 15A(2), the article must be wholly made of plastic and not merely contain plastic along with other materials.