Scope of "process" under Rule 96D raises a legal question on duty-free removal of base fabrics for lamination.

Rule 96D of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 permits removal of cotton, jute or man-made fabrics without payment of duty for processing in another factory, but the term "process" is not defined and must be read in the context of the tariff scheme. The note explains that the chapter notes and tariff headings separately identify the processes applicable to different fabrics, so the issue whether lamination is a permitted process and whether the goods remain within the same tariff heading after processing raises a question of law. On that basis, the matter was referred to the High Court for determination.

---

---

Issues: Whether a question of law arose on the scope of "process" under Rule 96D of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, for permitting removal of base fabrics without payment of duty for lamination.

Analysis: Rule 96D permits removal of cotton fabrics, jute manufactures, or man-made fabrics without payment of duty for processing in another factory. The term "process" is not defined in the rule, and its scope must be understood in the context of the tariff scheme applicable to different categories of fabrics. The relevant chapter notes under the tariff separately indicate the processes for fabrics under the stated headings, and the rule must be read consistently with that scheme. On that basis, the controversy whether lamination falls within the permissible process, and whether the goods continue to remain within the same tariff heading after processing, raises a legal issue fit for reference.

Conclusion: A question of law does arise, and the matter was referred to the High Court on whether base fabrics removed for lamination could be removed without payment of duty under Rule 96D.

---