Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether piled acrylic fabrics (processed) in running length were marketable goods chargeable to duty and classifiable under Heading 60.01 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, or whether they fell under Heading 63.01 and were not liable to duty.
Analysis: The earlier decision in the comparable matter of processed knitted fabrics was applied. It was held that no individual intermediate product of knitted or piled acrylic fabrics came into existence as a distinct commercial commodity known to the market. The material on record did not show that the goods were marketable or understood in trade as a separate saleable product. The fabric had already acquired the essential characteristics of blankets, and therefore the intermediate stage could not be treated as excisable goods merely because it could later be cut into blankets.
Conclusion: The goods were not established to be marketable excisable goods under Heading 60.01, and the Revenue's classification and duty demand failed.
Final Conclusion: The appeal was rejected, leaving the assessee's classification and non-liability to duty undisturbed.
Ratio Decidendi: An intermediate product is not exigible to duty unless it is shown to be marketable as a distinct commodity known to trade and possessing the character of goods.