1999 (4) TMI 341

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....venue suggests classification under Heading 59.09, the appellants claimed under Heading 52.05. 3. Heard Sri A.P. Datar, learned Advocate for the appellants and Sri R. Victor Thyagaraj, learned SDR for the revenue. 4. The learned Advocate submits that appellants claim under Heading 52.05 is supported by the following :- (a)     Circular No. 22/88-CX. 1, dated 10-8-1988 of CBEC holds that grey tyre cord fabrics if not subjected to any other processes, would fall under Chapter 52 and not under Chapter 59. Spirit of this classification squarely applies in the instant case. (b)     Circular No. 10/93, dated 5-11-1993 issued under Section 37B of Central Excises & Salt Act by the CBEC a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... in Appeal No. E/24 to 26/99. This decision for the period being both previous to the issue of Circular l993 (supra under Section 37B, it is clear that the Commissionerate itself has accepted the principles involved in the said circular even for the period prior to November, 1993. This establishes a precedent practice in their favour. (i)      The learned Advocate cites the following :- (i)      Ranadey Micro Nutrients v. C.C.E. as reported in 1996 (87) E.L.T. 19, wherein it is held that Board's circulars are binding on the department and the department cannot take stand contrary during the currency of those circulars. (ii)     Krishna Fruit Products v. C.C.E. as....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....has held that it cannot be presumed on a reading of Chapter heading 59.09 that items classifiable thereunder should be in cut piece and be only in coated condition because belting is always in running length (para 30). 6. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and records of the case. 7. The first issue which needs our consideration is whether the circular of CBEC, dated 5-11-1993 under Section 37B is binding on the department or not. In this respect, we find that in view of the clear decision in the matter in the case of Ranadey Micro Nutrients v. C.C.E. supra and Krishna Fruit Products v. C.C.E. supra, it is now well established law that any order passed by the revenue under Section 37B ibid shall have binding ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....finality, it set up an established practice for the pre-1993 period for classifying the goods under Heading 52.05. 9. When the above two findings are applied to the appeals before us, we further find as follows :- (a)     With respect to Appeals Nos. E/24 to 26/99 covering the period from 1-7-1989 to 29-2-1992 filed by the revenue, we find that the Orders-in-Appeal impugned bearing Nos. 125, 126 & 127/98, dated -/09/98 have simply followed the circular of the CBEC issued under Section 37B classifying the goods under Heading 52.05, by following the law established in the case of Ranadey Micro Nutrients supra which has already been discussed above. Since we have already held that in view of the Hon'ble Supreme C....