1987 (8) TMI 190

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Representative for the respondent and perused the record. 2. Briefly stated, the facts are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of cotton fabrics and man-made fabrics classifiable under Items Nos. 19 and 22 respectively of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (the Schedule is hereinafter referred to as the "CET"). They filed a classification list dated 31-10-1979 in respect of Sort No. 600010 - fabrics described as polyester cotton warp voil containing 54% polyester and 46% cotton at grey stage and 100% polyester after processing. The appellants claimed classification of the goods under Item No. 22(1) of the CET. However, the Assistant Collector, under his order dated 11-3-1980, directed that in additi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....T. 633 (S.C.) = 1985 ECR 1529. 5. Shri Sachar, in his submissions, however, contended that the Supreme Court in the Calico Mills case (supra) was not concerned with the excisability of the intermediate product but of the final product having cotton content of about 38.48% and artificial silk content of 61.52%, conforming to the requirements laid down in Item No. 22 CET. Shri Sachar sought to distinguish the facts of the present case by stating that the point at issue herein was the dutiability of the intermediate product and not of the final product which was not in dispute. So long as intermediate product emerged in the course of manufacture and it conformed to the description and prescription in the Central Excise Tariff Schedule, it bec....