TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2006 (4) TMI 433
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to classify the same under 18 III (ii). 2.  Heard both sides and perused the record. In order to appreciate the correct classification of Spun Yarn it is required to reproduce the Tariff Heading during the relevant period which was as under:- "III. Cellulosic spun yarn : Yarn, in which man-made fibre of cellulosic origin predominates in weight and, in or in relation to the manufacture of which any process is ordinarily carried on with the aid of power - (i) not containing, any man made fibres of non-cellulosic origin. (ii) Containing man made fibre of non-cellulosic origin."(emphasis added) From the above, it can be seen that the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., we are unable to persuade ourselves to equate non-cellulosic waste with non-celiulosic fibres in view of the in decisions referred to above." [1991 (37) ECR 542 - Paragraph 19] 5. We are of the view that the origin of the non-cellulosic fibre (whether from waste or not) would not be a guiding factor for classification of spun yarn under Tariff Heading 18 III, inasmuch that the wordings in the Tariff are unambiguous and clear. The word "Containing" in Tariff Heading 18 III (ii) would appear to make the source of fibre irrelevant. All the same, since the 3 member Bench had taken a view in the Vardhan Syntex case that yarn produced from synthetic waste would not be classifiable under (ii), it would not be appropriate for a co-ordinate ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....) in Appeal No. E/574/93-D. The Tribunal by the impugned order has dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant and confirmed the demand of duty and penalty imposed on the appellant. Learned senior counsel appearing for the assessee-appellant has made submissions based on certain facts of which no factual foundation was laid either in the reply to the show cause notice issued to it or before any of the authorities below. It has also not led any evidence in support of those facts. Under the circumstances, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order which is based mainly on facts except to the extent that it is not a case for levy of penalty as the classification list filed by the assessee-appellant had already been approved as '....