9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (5) TMI 316X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e respondent unit were treated as an exempted product by the Central Excise authorities and was considered to be not a 'texturised yarn' on the basis of various test reports of departmental Dy. Chief Chemist & of SASMIRA till October 2000. However, in October 2000, the excise authorities took samples of above product again and send it to VJTI and SASMIRA for analysis. VJTI, vide its test report of November 2000 concluded that the sample was "texturised yarn". On the basis of this report alore the department then directed the appellants to classify their product under Chapter sub-heading Nos. 5402.31 and 5402.32 not eligible to any exemption. 6. The respondent accordingly filed classification declaration No. 1/2000-01 with effect from 12-12-2000 classifying their product is texturised yarn of Nylon or other Polymides under sub-heading 5402.31 and texturised yarn of polyester under 5402.32 liable to excise duty at appropriate rate and at the same lime contending that these two products are actually multifolded yarn of Nylon and Polyester classifiable under sub-headings 5402.61 and 5402.62 attracting Nil rate of duty and duty was paid "under protest". Subsequently they filed ano ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing device before entering into Air Jet but effect side yarn directly enter Air Jet. After completion of Multifolding/overfeeding and/or variable overfeeding in the Air Jet, the yarn enters into stabilizing zone and from there to winding head. Thus, M/s. RBSMPL, undertake Air Texturising on input yarns by passing it through Air Jets. (c) The sample of product were also got tested/retested from department laboratories also. (i) Director, Central Revenue Control Laboratory (CRCL), in his report No. 14/RETEST/2000 dated 28-8-2003 opined that : (a) Air Textured Yarn is a Textured Yarn; and (b) The definition of Textured Yarn in the HSN is not restricted to Textured yarn of single monofilament yarn but covers all types of yarn which are having characteristics of Textured yarn. (ii) On the basis of letter dated 28-8-2003 of Director, CRCL, New Delhi, the samples were further got analyzed from Joint Director, Central Excise Laboratory, Mumbai, who in his Letter No. l8/1/2004-05/AIK/1592 dated 9-4-2004 further opined that : (a) &nb ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 18/19 years there has been no change in the machine or in the process of the manufacture. The matter got cropping up in between, but it has been settled by in time that the yarn manufactured or processed by Respondents with the help of Air Jet Texturising machine is not a "Textured yarn". 12. The classification dispute was raised by the department twice in the year of 1983 and then in 1994. On both these occasions the Dy. Chief Chemist held the disputed products to be non-textured yarns. The respondents of their own got tested the disputed yarn by the SASMIRA who vide its report dated 13-8-1998 stated that the yarn samples found to be containing more than one ply and are synthetic multifold yam and different from normal texturised yarn. 13. At the instance of the Department once again the said yarn was tested by SASMIRA & in their report dated 27-11-2000, they had clarified in the process of Multifolding, also known as Air Mingling done on the Air Jet Texturising machine cannot be treated as manufacturing of "textured yarn". Testing is always done on single yarn while in the case of Multifold yarn, muiti synthetic yarns are into the machine and yarn emerged from this p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Director, Central Excise Laboratory, Mumbai in his report dated 19-9-2002 had opined that the yarn was Multiple Yarn and not Textured Yarn. Not satisfied with the same, the Department forwarded Five samples for re-test to the Central Revenues Control Laboratories, New Delhi which recommended review of opinion by the Jt. Director Central Excise Laboratories, Mumbai, if necessary, by visit to the respondent unit. Accordingly the respondent unit was visited by Jt. Director, Central Excise Laboratory along with Assistant Chemical Examiner, Range Superintendent and Inspector on 20-11-2003. They confirmed their earlier opinion, after physical verification of the process in the mill and product. 15. What has been observed is that there were 6 test reports from the year 1983 onwards. The Departmental Laboratory consistently in its report of the years 1983, 1994 and 2002 holds that that the product manufactured/processed on air texturising machine is non-textured yarn. There are also two test reports from SASMIRA in the year 1998 and 2000 which opined that the disputed yarn as "Multiple Folded Yarn"and the same is not "Textured yarn". The report of VJTI (November 2000) is the only on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
