TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1985 (12) TMI 162
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... transferred to the Tribunal, for being dealt with as if it were an appeal filed before the Tribunal. 2. Since the show-cause notice related to four orders-in-appeal, four appeals with the Collector of Central Excise, Hyderabad as appellant and Messrs. Pennar Ceramic and General Industries as respondents', and bearing Nos. ED(SB)(T)13/74D & ED(SB)(T)18/7^D to 20/74D were registered for being dealt with as if they were appeals filed before the Tribunal by the Collector. In this order we are dealing with the above four appeals. 3.The appeals were partly heard on 22-11-1983, and the hearing was completed on 15-12-1983. 4. The appeals relate to the classification under the Central Excise Tariff Schedule of "Intalox saddles", "Rasching rings" and "unglazed balls" manufactured by the respondents. These were held by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Nellore, to be classifiable under Item 23B(4) of the Central Excise Tariff Schedule as "Chinaware and porcelainware, all sorts, not otherwise specified". The respondents filed appeals to the Appellate Collector of Central Excise, Madras. That authority held that the goods in question fell outside the scope of Item 2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....It was also clear from the definition that the term "porcelain" covered unglazed goods also. 7. Shri Tayal referred to the judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Saurabh Potteries and Ceramics, Indore, v. Appellate Collector of Central Excise, New Delhi repored in 1979 E.L.T. (J29). The judgment in that case was specifically with reference to Rasching rings. It had been held that though these articles might be unglazed, it did not matter, for the test of glaze applied only to tiles and to Chinaware and not to porcelainware. It had accordingly been held that Rasching rings were rightly classifiable under Item 23B(4). 8. Shri Tayal also referred to the judgement of the Madras High Court in the case of English Electric Co. of India Ltd. v. Superintendent of Central Excise and Others, reported in 1979 E.L.T. J36. In that case, it was held that H.R.C. Cartridge fuselinks were not classifiable under Item 23B, since they were not "porcelainware". Although, prima facie, this judgment appeared to be against the stand of the Department, Shri Tayal argued that it was actually in his favour. The High Court had held that porcelain normally contains. China clay,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he nature of stoneware and could not be classified under Item 23B. Shri Tayal argued that the present case could also be distinguished from the case which was the subject matter of the order of the Government of India, since the material facts, namely the compositon of the goods, were clearly different. 11. For the respondents, Shri Subramanian submitted that the goods were a very inferior type of clayware and not ceramicware. He referred to the report of the Chief Chemist, Central Revenues, regarding the goods. In that report it has been stated that the samples were in the form of dull white pieces having rough surfaces and that when written on by ink, the ink markings could not be easily rubbed off, showing that the samples were not glazed. Clearly, therefore, these goods were unglazed and they were also in the nature of clayware. Shri Subramanian also argued that even admitting that porcelainware had water absorption of below 3 per cent according to the ISI, it did not follow that all clayware which had less than 3 per cent water absorption was necessarily porcelainware. Shri Subramanian stated that the goods in question were used as "tower packings" in the process of ma....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the goods was not on record). 16. Shri Subramanian also stated that the factory of the respondents, which was at the relevant time situated in Nellore, Andhra Pradesh, had since been closed down, and they had started in another factory in Haryana. According to him, the goods manufactured by this factory were similar in all material respects to the goods manufactured by their earlier factory, and these goods were now being classified under Item 68 of the Central Excise Tariff, namely, as "All other goods N.E.S." and not under Item 25B. We asked Shri Tayal whether he had any submissions to make on this point. Shri Tayal stated that he had no information in this regard and therefore no submissions to make. 17. We have carefully considered the arguments advanced by both sides. A number of judgments and orders have been brought to our notice which have a more or less direct bearing on the issue before us. Thus, the judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court, reported in 1979 E.L.T. 29, referred to in para 7 above, is with specific reference to Rasching rings, and holds them to be classifiable under Item 23B(4). Although prima facie, this would appear to clinch the matter....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is also broadly the view which has been taken by the Appellate Collector in his Orders-in-Appeal and by the Government of India in Order-in-review referred to in para 10 above. 19. An equally strong ground against holding these goods to be covered by Item 23B is the difficulty in considering them as "porcelainware". As already observed in para 17 above, words such as "glassware" and "porcelainware" carry a particular connotation. This has been clearly brought out in the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Indo International Industries v. Commissioner of Sales Tax, UP, reported in 1981 E.L.T. 325 (S.C.). That judgment related to a case under the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948, and the question was whether hypodermic clinical syringes could be considered as "glassware" falling under Entry 39 of the First Schedule to the above Act. The Supreme Court observed that in interpreting items in statutes like the Excise tax Acts or Sales-tax Acts, which classify diverse products, articles and substances, resort should be had not to the scientific and technical meaning of the terms of expressions used, but their popular meaning, that is to say, the meaning attached to them by those ....