2005 (2) TMI 128

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... The dispute relates to the question whether the article manufactured by the respondent-assessee is classifiable under Tariff Heading 59.06 which is the contention of the appellant or Tariff Heading 52.06 which is the contention of the respondent-assessee. The two competing entries read as follows : "52.06 Cotton fabrics (excluding fabrics covered under Heading Nos. 52.09, 52.10 and 52.11, - ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., 58 or 60); for the purpose of this provision, no account should be taken of by resulting change of colour;" 2. The manufacturing process was not in dispute. The cotton cloth was purchased by the respondent-assessee and thereafter the cloth was dipped in a mixture of wax, china clay and yellow chlorine, etc. It was then passed through rollers operated manually and squeezed to the required thic....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....test was done by the Chief Chemist of the Central Revenues Control Laboratory, Government of India which showed that the three samples were not wholly impregnated and on the other hand the warp and weft of the cloth could be seen by the naked eye. The Tribunal, therefore, came to the conclusion that this situation was covered by Chapter Note 5(a) and therefore, taken out of the purview of Tariff H....