2000 (9) TMI 509 - Commissioner - Central Excise

Successful Appeal: 'Rockwool' classified under sub-heading 6807.10 of CETA 1985

The appeal was successful as the Commissioner determined that the 'Rockwool' manufactured by the appellant should be classified under sub-heading 6807.10 ... Wool - Rockwool - Interpretation of statute Issues: Classification of goods under Chapter 68 of CETA 1985Analysis:1. The appeal was filed against an Order-in-Original confirming demands in a classification matter under Section 11A and imposing a penalty under Rule 173Q of Central Excise Rules, 1944. The issue revolved around the classification of 'Rockwool' manufactured by the appellant under Chapter 68 of CETA 1985. The appellant changed the classification from sub-heading No. 6803.00 to 6807.10, resulting in demands being confirmed, leading to the appeal.2. The primary contention was the classification of 'Rockwool' where more than 25% by weight of blast furnace slag was used. The appellant argued for classification under Heading 6807.10, specific to goods with more than 25% blast furnace slag, while the lower authority classified it under Heading 6803.00, covering 'Slagwool, Rockwool, and similar mineral wools.' The advocate emphasized the specificity of Heading 6807.10 and the legislative history supporting the new tariff heading created post-14-5-1997.3. The Commissioner analyzed the tariff headings, noting that Heading 6803.00 covered rockwool in general, while Heading 6807.10 specifically covered rockwool with more than 25% blast furnace slag. By considering the language of the headings and the legislative intent behind the changes, the Commissioner concluded that the subject item was appropriately classifiable under sub-heading 6807.10, being more specific for a restricted variety of goods.4. The Commissioner acknowledged the arguments presented by the appellant's advocate, highlighting that an alternative interpretation would render part of the tariff redundant and that the legislative history supported the shift of the item's classification from exemption notifications to the tariff sub-heading. Based on the detailed analysis and the advocate's compelling arguments, the Commissioner set aside the lower authority's order and allowed the appeal with consequential relief.