Tariff classification follows Supreme Court precedent: polyethylene tanks treated as buildersware under sub-heading 3925.10.

Polyethylene tanks were held classifiable as buildersware under sub-heading 3925.10 of the Central Excise Tariff, not under sub-heading 3926.90. The classification issue had already been settled by the Supreme Court for similar tanks and vats manufactured by the same assessee, and that binding ratio was applied to the present product. As a result, the earlier Tribunal view relied on by the assessee could not be followed, the appeal failed, and the Commissioner (Appeals) order was left undisturbed.

---

---

Issues: Whether polyethylene tanks were classifiable under sub-heading 3925.10 or under sub-heading 3926.90 of the Central Excise Tariff.

Analysis: The classification dispute had already been settled by the Supreme Court in respect of similar tanks and vats manufactured by the same assessee. The earlier Tribunal view relied upon by the appellants had been set aside by the Supreme Court on the classification question, and the product was held classifiable as buildersware under sub-heading 3925.10 rather than under sub-heading 3926.90.

Conclusion: The tanks were held classifiable under sub-heading 3925.10 and not under sub-heading 3926.90, against the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The appeal failed and the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) was left undisturbed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the Supreme Court has settled the classification of an identical product, that ratio governs subsequent appeals involving the same product and classification question.

---