1982 (4) TMI 283

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ured P.V.C. microporous battery separators in a continuous, automatic process from the powder of PVC resin by sintering method. They claimed classification of the said battery separators under item 15A (2) of the Central Excise Tariff and the benefit of exemption Notification No. 68 of 1971. However, the Assistant Collector held the same to be classifiable under Item 68 of the Central Excise Tariff. The appeal against the order of the Assistant Co]lector was rejected. In rejecting the petitioner's appeal, the Appellate Collector took; the view that the goods in question having assumed identifiable character of an article which had a specific use as battery separator, were no longer qualified for assessment under Item 15A(2) the scope whereo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... to their natural import but also, those things which the interpretation clause declares that they shall include." (ii) The PVC battery separators in question are rectangular and profile sections and not sheets or any other articles excepted in Notification No. 68 of 1971. For an article to be a sheet, it should have uniform thickness within the limits of tolerance as specified in IS 6307-1971. In the case of PVC battery separators, its thickness is not uniform on account of ribs. In this regard, they have relied on the affidavit of Dr. S.P. Potnis, Sr. Professor of Polymer Technology and Head of the Plastics and Paints Division in the Department of Chemical Technology of the Bombay University, who has opined that the products in qu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ther of wood, microporous rubber or glass fibre etc. or PVC which is a plastic resin." They also drew attention to the opinion given by Dr. S. P. Potnis to say that the product in question had various uses such as battery separators, packing pieces, micronic filters etc. and, therefore, identity of the product was not exclusively that of a component of a battery. (b) The analogy of classification of crude forged iron and steel products subjected to polishing and machining under Item 68 as applied by the Appellate Collector was not relevant to the present case on account of the fact that PVC battery separators were sold as such as they emerged and were not subjected to machining, polishing or any other similar process before clearanc....