1999 (10) TMI 177

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hri Gopal Prasad, Advocate, for the Respondents. [Order per : G.R. Sharma, Member (T)]. - The short point for determination in these appeals is whether the net fabric woven on looms manufactured by the respondent is classifiable under Chapter Heading 5206 as claimed by the respondent or 5804.90 as held by the Department. 2. The facts of the case in brief are that the respondents are ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ndings. 3. Shri R.S. Sangia, ld. DR arguing their case submits that the decision of this Tribunal in the case of M/s. Mehta Netting v. C.C.E. reported in 1990 (50) E.L.T. 316 is very relevant. He refers to para 10 and submitted that the observations made - "In the other words the Tariff Entry 5804 excluded, inter alia woven fabrics. This means, one may argue that the net fabric woven in....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sification under Chapter sub-heading 5804.00. He therefore, prays that the appeals may be allowed more so as net fabric appears under Heading 5804.00. 4. Shri Gopal Prasad, ld. Counsel appearing for the respondents herein submits that the fabric is manufactured by them by weaving on power looms. Thus, the fabric is woven fabric on power looms. He submits that a reading of Tariff Entry 5804....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....submits therefore the decision of the Tribunal in regard to classification of woven fabrics under Chapter Heading 5804 is only a obiter dicta and not precedent. He, therefore, submits that their product qualifies for classification under Chapter Heading 5206 and prays that the appeal may be rejected. 5. We have heard the rival submissions. We have perused the case law. We have also perused....