Marketability and tariff classification disputes: remand upheld for fresh adjudication, and non-marketable goods plea rejected.

A remand for de novo classification under Tariff Heading 56.01 was upheld because it merely gave the assessee an opportunity to answer the departmental case on classification. The direction was treated as a proper procedural course for fresh adjudication on the tariff issue. The claim that the goods were non-marketable and therefore not excisable was rejected because they were sold to coir industries and garment manufacturers after manufacture. Their character as an intermediate product did not defeat marketability or excisability. The appeal accordingly failed and the classification remand remained undisturbed.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the lower appellate authority was justified in remanding the matter for reconsideration of classification of the goods under Tariff Heading 56.01. (ii) Whether the goods were non-marketable and therefore not excisable.

Issue (i): Whether the lower appellate authority was justified in remanding the matter for reconsideration of classification of the goods under Tariff Heading 56.01.

Analysis: The direction of remand was confined to giving the assessee an opportunity to meet the departmental case that the goods fell under Tariff Heading 56.01. The remand was treated as a proper procedural course for de novo adjudication on classification.

Conclusion: The remand on classification was upheld.

Issue (ii): Whether the goods were non-marketable and therefore not excisable.

Analysis: The goods were found to be sold to coir industries and garment manufacturers after manufacture. Their use as an intermediate product did not negate marketability or excisability.

Conclusion: The plea of non-marketable goods was rejected.

Final Conclusion: The appeal failed, and the order directing de novo adjudication on classification remained undisturbed.

---