Specific tariff classification prevails for metallic yarn where the entry expressly includes man-made metallic yarn.

Metallic yarn for the relevant period was held to fall under Item 18 of the Central Excise Tariff as synthetic fibre because Explanation (IV) expressly included man-made metallic yarn within that entry. The earlier Supreme Court ruling cited by the appellant was distinguished, as it concerned an earlier tariff regime in which metallic yarn was not specifically covered by Item 18. Since the tariff itself specifically brought metallic yarn within Item 18, that entry was treated as the more specific classification provision, and classification under Item 15A(2) as articles of plastic was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether metallic yarn for the relevant period was classifiable under Item 18 of the Central Excise Tariff as synthetic fibre, or under Item 15A(2) as articles of plastic.

Analysis: Item 18 expressly covered synthetic fibre and, by Explanation (IV), included man-made metallic yarn. The earlier Supreme Court ruling relied upon by the appellant was distinguished because it concerned an earlier regime in which metallic yarn was not specifically included in Item 18. Once the tariff entry itself specifically brought metallic yarn within Item 18, that entry became the more specific classification provision for the goods in question.

Conclusion: Metallic yarn was correctly classified under Item 18 of the Central Excise Tariff, and the appellant was not entitled to classification under Item 15A(2).

---