Blended yarn classification turned on evidence of polyester-viscose content, supporting duty, confiscation, and penalty.

Classification of blended yarn turned on whether the disputed lots contained polyester fibre mixed with viscose or non-cellulosic synthetic waste. The record, including test reports, statutory and private records, cone markings, customer orders, and invoices, was treated as showing polyester-viscose blended yarn, so the tariff entry for fibre-based yarn applied rather than the entry claimed by the assessee. The earlier precedent cited was distinguished because synthetic waste had been admitted there, unlike in this dispute. Refusal of cross-examination of the Dy. Chief Chemist was not treated as vitiating the result, as the report was clear and other testing remedies were available. The duty demand, confiscation, and penalty were therefore upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the yarn manufactured by the assessee was classifiable under Tariff Item 18-III(i) as claimed by the assessee or under Tariff Item 18-III(ii), and whether the duty demand, confiscation, and penalty were sustainable.

Analysis: The material on record, including the test reports of the Dy. Chief Chemist, the statutory and private records, the cone markings, the customer orders for polyester/viscose yarn, and the invoices, showed that the disputed lots contained polyester fibre blended with viscose and not non-cellulosic synthetic waste. The earlier precedent relied upon by the assessee was distinguished on facts because, in that case, the use of synthetic waste was admitted, whereas here the very presence of such waste was disputed. The refusal to permit cross-examination of the Dy. Chief Chemist did not vitiate the order because the report was clear and the assessee had other remedies available, including obtaining fresh testing.

Conclusion: The yarn was correctly classified under Tariff Item 18-III(ii). The duty demand was valid, and the confiscation and penalty were sustainable.

Final Conclusion: The appeal failed on merits because the assessee did not establish that the goods were manufacture from non-cellulosic synthetic waste, and the departmental classification and consequential levy were upheld.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the evidence shows that blended yarn contains polyester fibre rather than non-cellulosic synthetic waste, classification must follow the tariff entry applicable to fibre-based yarn, and the supporting demand and penalty can be sustained on proof of misdeclaration.

---