TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1983 (2) TMI 292
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ar, pre-shrunk finish". They had also declared the terene contents as 28% at the grey stage and 31.8% at the processed stage. The appellants sought classification of the fabric under Item No. 19-I(2) of the Central Excise Tariff Schedule (C.E.T.) which was allowed by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Bombay. Simultaneously, samples were drawn by the Excise authorities for chemical test to ascertain the composition of the fabric. A Show Cause Notice-cum-Demand dated 8-8-1975 was issued by the Range Superintendent for a sum of Rs. 10, 507.16 representing the difference in duty between that leviable under C.E.T. Item No. 19-I(la) and that paid under Item No. 19-I(2). The notice covered the clearances effected during the period from 14-5-1975 to 9-6-1975. On receipt of the test report from the Deputy Chief Chemist to the effect that the terene (a non-cellulosic fibre) content of the processed fabrics amounted to 32.1%, the Superintendent issued a second Show Cause Notice-cum-Demand dated 18-12-1976 for the period from 3-1-1976 to 3-2-1976. The appellants submitted in reply to the two notices that samples should have been drawn at the grey fabric stage only to ascertain the ter....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he fabric was produced as soon as it came out of the loom. The Central Excise Department itself required that the production of fabric should be recorded in the RG 1 register at the grey stage. (d) Only the Central Board of Excise & Customs action under Section 35-A of the Central Excises & Salt Act could have reviewed the decision taken by the Assistant Collector in approving the classification list, the price lists and RT 12 returns. The Assistant Collector could not have reviewed his own orders. 4.  Dr P.V. Jois, Secretary (Law), Mill Owners' Association Bombay, appearing on behalf to the appellants stated that the grey fabric was subjected to the processes of scouring, bleaching, dyeing and printing. The Brosso process of printing adopted by the appellants resulted in the liberation of acidic matter which burnt out part of the cotton fibre present in the fabric and that this explained the fact that the fabric, after processing, had a terene content over 30%. The manufacture of the fabric was complete when the fabric as woven came off the loom, i.e. at the grey stage. The terene content at the grey stage was less than 30%. Therefore, the proper classification of the f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re grey fabrics falling under Item No. 19-1(2) CET were processed in the same factory and the processed fabrics fell under Item No. 19-I(A)-CET, it was the latter item that was relevant for assessment. He further submitted that the value for the purpose of levy of duty also had to be determined with reference to the stage of removal or clearance of the fabric from the factory. Applying this criterion, the processed fabric correctly fell for classification under Item No. 19-I(1 A) CET. With regard to the appellants' submission on the applicability of Rules 10, and 10A Shri Tayal drew the attention of the Bench to the judgment of the Delhi High Court in the case of Bawa Potteries v. Union of India (1981 E.L.T. 114 (Delhi) and submitted that Rule 10 permitted a review of the order of assessment. 6.  Replying to Shri Tayal's submissions, Dr. Jois submitted that a quasi-judicial decision could not be reviewed by a Show Cause Notice. He referred in this context to the judgment of the Gujarat High Court in the case of Bhor Industries Ltd., v. Union of India 1980 E.L.T. 752 (Guj.). He also submitted that with the retrospective amendment of Rules 9 and 49, the position has been made....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gadlapet, mattress fabrics, terry towel including turkish towel ; terry towelling cloth blanket, canvas, duck, filter cloth, tracing cloth, and bukram cloth. (1A) Cotton fabrics other than those falling under (1) containing 30% or more by weight of fibre, or yarn, or both, of non-cellulosic origin. (2) Others :- (a) Cotton fabrics, superfine-that is to say fabrics in which the average count of yarn is 61s or more. (b) Cotton fabrics, fine-that is to say fabrics in which the average count of yarn is 41s or more but is less than 61s. (c) Cotton fabrics, Medium-A - that is to say, fabrics in which the average count of yarn is 26s or more but is less than 41s. (d) Cotton fabrics, Medium-B - that is to say, fabrics in which the average count of yarn is 17s or more but is less than 26s. (e) Cotton fabrics Coarse-that is to say, fabrics in which the average count of yarn in less than 17s. (f) Cotton fabrics not otherwise specified. 10.  From the percentage composition data noted in para 3, it is clear that though the grey fabric did not fall under Item 19-I(1A) because of its non-cellulosic fibre content being less than 30% the processed fabric correctly fe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ubt on the question whether the process to which the grey fabric was subjected by the appellants in their factory amounted to "manufacture" within the meaning of Section 2(f) of the Central Excises and Salt Act and whether such processed fabric could be deemed to excisable under Item 19 of the CET. Both these questions have to be answered in the affirmative. The contention of the Counsel for the appellants that Act No. 6 of 1980 only regularised the levy of processing stage duties and that the basic classification even in the case of processed fabrics had to be determined with reference to the grey fabric is also not acceptable for the reason that the said Act had the effect of making processed fabrics as a distinct entry in the excise tariff under the relevant items in addition to unprocessed fabric. The appellants' contention that reclassification of the processed fabric under Item 19-I(IA) would make them fall foul of the Textile Commissioner's stamping regulations lacks substance since the stamping regulations which may have their own rationale cannot be the determinant criteria for classification of the goods for levy of excise duty under the Central Excises & Salt Act. We, th....