Marketability and classification of mosaic tile components depend on independent commercial existence, not mere assembly or sale pattern.

Marketability is the key test for excisability of the individual fired pieces used in mosaic tiles: duty depends on whether they have an independent commercial existence and can actually be bought and sold as such. The fact that the assessee did not sell them separately is not decisive, but the marketability requirement must still be proved on evidence. The analysis also notes that the commercial product is the assembled mosaic tile, and that Rule 2(a) cannot by itself treat separate pieces as the final product if they are known commercially only as part of the completed mosaic. Classification under Chapter 69 similarly depends on whether the pieces acquire the character of tiles only after assembly with backing.

---

---

Issues: Whether the individual pieces used to form mosaic tiles were marketable and excisable goods, and if so, how they were to be classified.

Analysis: The liability to duty depended on whether the individual fired pieces had an independent market existence and could ively be bought and sold as such. Mere non-sale by the assessee was not decisive, but marketability had to be shown by reference to actual capability of sale in the market. The Tribunal also considered that the commercial product sold was the assembled mosaic tile, and that Rule 2(a) could not by itself treat the separate pieces as the final product if they were known commercially only as part of the completed mosaic. Note 2 to Chapter 69 was also relevant because products classifiable there must have been fired after shaping, while the question remained whether the pieces acquired the character of mosaic tiles only after assembly in the mould with backing.

Conclusion: The issue of excisability and classification of the individual pieces required fresh adjudication on evidence, and the impugned order could not stand.

---