2015 (4) TMI 455

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Adv. Ms D Sehgal, Adv. & Mrs Manik Karanjawala, Adv. ORDER The respondent herein is the manufacturer of blended marble vinyl flooring which comes under the chapter 68 of the Schedule of Central Excise Tariff, 1985 Act under sub-heading No. 6807. It was provisionally approved by the Assistant Commissioner under Rule 19-B of Central Excise Rules, 1944. However, thereafter two show cause notices were issued by the Assistant Commissioner. One show cause notice was for the period March 1995 to July, 1995 and other for the period August 1995 to November 1995. In these show cause notices it was alleged that upon chemical test conducted on the product, the product is to be classified under heading 3918.10. On this basis differential amounts of e....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....olymers of vinyl chloride, resin, plaster etc. and on the grounds that the goods are generally known as plastic tiles in the market and therefore they are classifiable under heading 3918.10. A perusal of the order of the Assistant Commissioner which was extensively referred to by Mr. Sanghi, learned senior counsel appearing for the Department, would show that the Assistant Commissioner though took note of the judgment in the case of Bhor Industries Ltd. vs. CCE, 1980 (6) ELT 752, he was of the opinion that the "predominance physically of materials" test laid down therein would not be applicable any more in view of the change in the tariff rules. To this extent Assistant Commissioner was right and even CEGAT has accepted this position. Howe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....o and not disputed by the Assistant Commissioner in his impugned order. It is also a fact that the plastic materials are used as binding material. Therefore, the conclusion arrived at by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in case of M/s Bhor Industries Ltd would stand good in case of the appellants also. The conclusion that the essential character of the tiles is derived from the limestone and cement content cannot be brushed aside unless the facts in the appellants case in shown and proved to differ from the cited case. This is where the Assistant Commissioner has failed. He has in some instances reproduced the basis for holding the product under ch. 39 verbatim from the order of the Assistant Commissioner in case of Bhor Industries Ltd wh....