Contact us   Feedback   Annual Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (4) TMI 455 - SUPREME COURT

2015 (4) TMI 455 - SUPREME COURT - 2015 (318) E.L.T. 604 (SC) - Classification of blended marble vinyl flooring - Classification under heading 3918.10 or sub-heading 6807 - Held that:- From the order of the CEGAT [2003 (6) TMI 46 - CESTAT, MUMBAI] it becomes clear that the CEGAT also accepted that the test in Bhor Industries [1980 (10) TMI 60 - HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD] was not be applicable any longer. Therefore, the CEGAT resorted to note 3(b) of General Interpretation Rules which is .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s placed by either side before the Courts below, the CEGAT noted that use of limestone to the extent of 84.10% and use of plastic only as a binder clearly indicated that characteristic of lime stone that confers upon the material its use, in the present case. We may also remark that the Department could not produce any evidence in support of its contention that the goods are known as plastic tiles in the market and therefore this ground was rightly rejected. It may be reiterated that the onus li .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

: Mr Ravinder Narain, Adv. Mr Ajay Aggarwal, Adv. Ms Mallika Joshi, Adv. Ms Shravani Shekhar, Adv. Ms Ruchika, Adv. Mr Rajan Narain, Adv. Mr Devan Parekh, Sr. Adv. Mr R N Karanjawala, Adv. Ms nandini Gore, Adv. Mr Abhishek Roy, 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 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

m of ₹ 15,43,1679.55 and 13,48,149.00 respectively were demanded The respondent contested the aforesaid show cause notices and reiterated its position that the goods were rightly classified under Chapter 68 sub-heading 6807. The Order-in-Original passed by the Assistant Commissioner on 27.3.1996 did not accept the aforesaid contention of the respondent and confirmed the demand raised in the show cause notices by classifying the product under sub-heading 3918.10. The respondent preferred ap .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

erred by the Department questioning the validity of the orders passed by the CEGAT. We may mention at the outset that the heading 6807 of the Central Excise tariff pertains to articles of stone, plaster, cement, asbestos, mica or similar material not elsewhere specified or included. On the other hand, heading 3918.10 pertains to floor covering of plastics whether or not self-adhesive. Case of the Department is that report on the basis of these goods indicated them to contain polymers of vinyl ch .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ot;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. However, thereafter, as the reading of the order suggests, the Assistant Commissioner noted that the floor tiles manufactured by the respondent consist of a thoroughly branded composition of thermo plastic binder asbestos fiber and filter & pigments. The order .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

oner fell in error, which error is rightly corrected by the Commissioner (Appeals). The Commissioner (Appeals) noted the relevant facts and corrected the error committed by the Assistant Commissioner which is apparent from following portion of the orders of the Commissioner (Appeals) "Considering the composition of tiles in the present case before me and that of Bhor Industries Ltd. discussed by the Hon'ble High Court, one cannot ignore the similarities existing in both the cases. The a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

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 which .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version