1984 (4) TMI 167

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....R., for the Respondent. [Order per : K.L. Rekhi, Member (T)].  - The appellants imported special papermaker's wool blended with special papermaker's synthetic polyester. The goods were assessed to Customs Duty under the residuary Item No. 87 of the Indian Customs Tariff then in force at the rate of 60% plus 10% adv. The appellants applied for refund claiming reassessment at 40% plus 5% ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rying from 19% to 25%, such blended goods could not be classified as un-manufactured textile material under either of these two items. 2.  At the time of hearing of the appeal before us, the appellants maintained that synthetic polyester content of 19% to 25% was a minor one and the blended fibres retained the predominant character of raw wool assessable under Item 46(2). Alternatively, th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tion can be corrected at any stage so long as the nature and substance of the claim did not change and the appellants did not ask for any higher amount of refund than originally claimed. 3.  The department's representative stated that the goods were not raw wool but a blended material. The interpretative rules under the current Customs Tariff Act, 1975 which based classification of composi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nt that a blended material containing 19% to 25% of polyester fibre could not be considered as raw wool under Item 46(2). However, there is force in the appellants' plea for classification of the blended goods under the alternative Item 46(4)(b). Raw wool is a natural fibre of animal origin while polyester is a synthetic or man-made fibre. What the appellants imported was a mixture or blend of the....